PROOF ISSN 1322-0330

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Hansard Home Page: http://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/hansard/ E-mail: [email protected] Phone: (07) 3406 7314 Fax: (07) 3210 0182

Subject FIRST SESSION OF THE FIFTY-SECOND PARLIAMENT Page Tuesday, 9 October 2007

ASSENT TO BILLS ...... 3213 Tabled paper: Letter, dated 12 September 2007, from Her Excellency the Governor to Mr Speaker advising of assent to Bills on 11 September 2007...... 3213 ELECTORAL DISTRICT OF BRISBANE CENTRAL ...... 3213 Resignation of Member ...... 3213 Tabled paper: Letter, dated 14 September 2007, from Peter Beattie MP to Mr Speaker advising of his resignation as Member for Brisbane Central...... 3213 By-Election Dates ...... 3213 Tabled paper: Copy of a writ for election, dated 16 September 2007, for the electoral district of Brisbane Central...... 3213 SPEAKER’S STATEMENT ...... 3214 Camera Operators in the Gallery ...... 3214 PANEL OF TEMPORARY SPEAKERS ...... 3214 Resignation of Ms K Jones; Nomination of Mr W Wendt ...... 3214 PETITIONS ...... 3214 TABLED PAPERS ...... 3214 MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS ...... 3217 Afghanistan, Death of Trooper David Pearce ...... 3217 Ministerial Arrangements ...... 3218 Tabled paper: Queensland Government Gazette, Vol. 346, No. 9, dated 13 September 2007...... 3218 Tabled paper: Queensland Government Gazette, Vol. 346, No. 23, dated 21 September 2007...... 3218 Bligh Labor Government ...... 3218 Transit Authority ...... 3219 Equine Influenza ...... 3220 Transit Authority ...... 3221 Infrastructure and Planning ...... 3221 Equine Influenza ...... 3222 Queensland Ambulance Service ...... 3222 Tabled paper: Document, undated, titled ‘Audit of the Queensland Ambulance Service’...... 3222 Tabled paper: Copy of a joint statement, dated 8 October 2007, by the Commissioner, Queensland Ambulance Service, and the Secretary, Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Union titled ‘Roster Reform Evaluation Outcomes’...... 3223

L J OSMOND N J LAURIE CHIEF HANSARD REPORTER CLERK OF THE PARLIAMENT Table of Contents — Tuesday, 9 October 2007

QPRIME; Random Breath Tests ...... 3223 Tabled paper: Media release, dated 8 October 2007, by the Queensland Police Service titled ‘Random Breath Testing Figures’...... 3224 Queensland Economy ...... 3224 Department of Public Works ...... 3225 Health Funding ...... 3225 Climate Change ...... 3226 Local Government Reform ...... 3226 Small Business ...... 3227 STANDING ORDERS COMMITTEE ...... 3227 Appointment of Hon. PT Lucas ...... 3227 PREMIER OF QUEENSLAND ...... 3227 SCRUTINY OF LEGISLATION COMMITTEE ...... 3227 Report ...... 3227 Tabled paper: Scrutiny of Legislation Committee Alert Digest No. 10 of 2007...... 3227 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE ...... 3228 Ministerial Standards ...... 3228 Water Assets ...... 3228 Inner-City Suburbs, Services and Infrastructure ...... 3229 Goods and Services Tax ...... 3230 Daylight Saving ...... 3230 Power Price Increases ...... 3231 Water Restrictions ...... 3232 Local Transition Committees ...... 3232 Gambling Revenue ...... 3233 Overseas Trained Nurses ...... 3234 Elective Surgery ...... 3234 Queensland Injectors Health Network ...... 3235 Tabled paper: Copy of a Queensland Injectors Health Network flyer ...... 3235 Housing Affordability ...... 3236 Prep Year, Teacher Aides ...... 3236 Fraser Island, Dingoes ...... 3237 Queensland Ambulance Service ...... 3238 AusLink 2 ...... 3238 MATTERS OF PUBLIC INTEREST ...... 3239 Afghanistan, Death of Trooper David Pearce; Queensland Labor Government ...... 3239 Blueprint for the Bush ...... 3241 Disability Services ...... 3242 Needle and Syringe Program ...... 3242 Tabled paper: Copy of a Queensland Injectors Health Network flyer...... 3243 Beattie, Mr PD ...... 3243 World Mental Health Day ...... 3244 African Refugees ...... 3245 Equine Influenza ...... 3246 True Sport Lives Here Initiative ...... 3247 Road Safety ...... 3248 Murrumba Downs, Bruce Highway On-Ramp ...... 3249 TRANSPORT LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL ...... 3250 Second Reading ...... 3250 Tabled paper: Copy of letter, dated 30 September 2007, from John Quane, President, Limousine Association Queensland Inc to the Minister for Transport in relation to the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill...... 3253 Tabled paper: Copy of letter, dated 30 September 2007, from John Quane, President, Limousine Association Queensland Inc to the Premier in relation to the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill...... 3253 Tabled paper: Copy of letter, dated 3 October 2007, from John Quane, President, Limousine Association Queensland Inc to the Minister for Transport in relation to the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill...... 3253 FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION AND AUDIT AND ANOTHER ACT AMENDMENT BILL ...... 3254 First Reading ...... 3254 Second Reading ...... 3254 TRANSPORT LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL ...... 3255 Second Reading ...... 3255 Tabled paper: Explanatory notes to amendments to the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill...... 3304 Consideration in Detail ...... 3305 Clauses 1 to 28, as read, agreed to...... 3305 Clause 29, as read, agreed to...... 3306 Clauses 30 to 38, as read, agreed to...... 3306 Clause 39, as read, agreed to...... 3306 Clauses 40 to 43, as read, agreed to...... 3306 Table of Contents — Tuesday, 9 October 2007

Clause 44 (Insertion of new ss 35A-35C)— ...... 3306 Clause 44, as amended, agreed to...... 3306 Clauses 45 and 46, as read, agreed to...... 3306 Clause 47, as read, agreed to...... 3307 Clauses 48 to 50, as read, agreed to...... 3307 Clause 51 (Insertion of new s 48A)—...... 3307 Clause 51, as amended, agreed to...... 3307 Clauses 52 to 65, as read, agreed to...... 3307 Clause 66 (Amendment of s 60 (Evidentiary aids))— ...... 3307 Clause 66, as amended, agreed to...... 3308 Clause 67, as read, agreed to...... 3308 Insertion of new clause— ...... 3308 Amendment agreed to...... 3310 Clauses 68 to 76, as read, agreed to...... 3310 Clause 77 (Amendment of sch 4 (Dictionary))— ...... 3310 Clause 77, as amended, agreed to...... 3311 Clause 78 (Amendment of s 62 (Proceedings for offences)— ...... 3311 Clause 78, as amended, agreed to...... 3311 Clauses 79 to 82, as read, agreed to...... 3311 Clause 83 (Insertion of new s 124A)—...... 3311 Clause 83, as amended, agreed to...... 3312 Clauses 84 to 86, as read, agreed to...... 3312 Clause 87, as read, agreed to...... 3313 Clauses 88 to 92, as read, agreed to...... 3313 Schedule (Minor amendments of Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995)— ...... 3313 Schedule, as amended, agreed to...... 3313 Third Reading ...... 3313 Long Title ...... 3313 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AMENDMENT BILL ...... 3313 Second Reading ...... 3313 ADJOURNMENT ...... 3314 Community Organisations ...... 3314 Deaths of Mr DW Mosby and Mr J Ahmat ...... 3315 Mourilyan Harbour Boat Ramp and Jetty ...... 3316 Death of Mr A Payet ...... 3316 Montville-Flaxton Region, Iconic Status ...... 3317 Tabled paper: Bundle of correspondence relating to the iconic status for The Blackall Range and the Conondale Range...... 3317 Queensland Premier; Eatons Hill State School ...... 3317 Mary Valley Heritage Railway ...... 3318 Bulimba State School ...... 3318 ShelterBox; Festivals, Currumbin Electorate ...... 3319 Camp Hill-Carina Welfare Association; Clem Jones Sports Centre ...... 3320 ATTENDANCE ...... 3320 09 Oct 2007 Legislative Assembly 3213 TUESDAY, 9 OCTOBER 2007

Legislative Assembly Mr SPEAKER (Hon. MF Reynolds, Townsville) read prayers and took the chair at 9.30 am. Mr SPEAKER (Hon. MF Reynolds, Townsville) acknowledged the traditional owners of the land upon which this parliament is assembled and the custodians of the sacred lands of our state.

ASSENT TO BILLS Mr SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have to report that I have received from Her Excellency the Governor a letter in respect of assent to certain bills, the contents of which will be incorporated in the Record of Proceedings. I table the letter for the information of members. The Honourable M.F. Reynolds, AM, MP Speaker of the Legislative Assembly Parliament House George Street BRISBANE QLD 4000 I hereby acquaint the Legislative Assembly that the following Bills, having been passed by the Legislative Assembly and having been presented for the Royal Assent, were assented to in the name of Her Majesty The Queen on the date shown: Date of Assent: 11 September 2007 “A Bill for An Act for the development of land in particular parts of the State, and for related purposes.” “A Bill for An Act to amend the Commission for Children and Young People and Child Guardian Act 2000.” “A Bill for An Act to amend Acts administered by the Treasurer.” These Bills are hereby transmitted to the Legislative Assembly, to be numbered and forwarded to the proper Officer for enrolment, in the manner required by law. Yours sincerely Governor 12 September 2007 Tabled paper: Letter, dated 12 September 2007, from Her Excellency the Governor to Mr Speaker advising of assent to Bills on 11 September 2007.

ELECTORAL DISTRICT OF BRISBANE CENTRAL

Resignation of Member Mr SPEAKER: Honourable members, I have to report that I have received the following letter from Mr Peter Beattie, member of the electoral district of Brisbane Central. I read this letter to members, which is addressed to myself as Speaker of the Legislative Assembly— Dear Mike I hereby tender my resignation as Member for Brisbane Central, effective on and from 14 September 2007. Yours sincerely Peter Beattie Tabled paper: Letter, dated 14 September 2007, from Peter Beattie MP to Mr Speaker advising of his resignation as Member for Brisbane Central. By-Election Dates Mr SPEAKER: I have to inform the House that Her Excellency the Governor has issued a writ for the election of a member to serve in the Legislative Assembly of Queensland for the electoral district of Brisbane Central. The dates in connection with the issue of the writ are as follows: Issue of writ—16 September 2007; Cut-off day for electoral roll—22 September 2007; Date of nomination—25 September 2007; Polling day—13 October 2007; Return of writ—12 November 2007. Tabled paper: Copy of a writ for election, dated 16 September 2007, for the electoral district of Brisbane Central. 3214 Tabled Papers 09 Oct 2007

SPEAKER’S STATEMENT

Camera Operators in the Gallery Mr SPEAKER: Honourable members, I advise that I have been informed by the president of the media gallery that it is taking longer than previously anticipated for the four TV networks to capture the broadcast in their studios in the Annexe. I am also undertaking investigations to ensure that the quality of the pictures and sound given to the four networks is of a high standard. Therefore, I advise that, in consultation with the president of the gallery, I have decided to allow the camera operators onto the floor of the parliament for the October and November sittings this year. I have also given permission today for photographers from the Courier-Mail, the Financial Review and the Gold Coast Bulletin to take photographs in the chamber in accordance with the guidelines.

PANEL OF TEMPORARY SPEAKERS

Resignation of Ms K Jones; Nomination of Mr W Wendt Mr SPEAKER: Honourable members, in accordance with standing order 11, I have appointed the member for Ipswich West to the panel of temporary speakers to replace the member for Ashgrove.

PETITIONS

The following honourable member has lodged a paper petition for presentation—

Cash Converters Mr Purcell, from 11,509 petitioners, requesting the House to abandon the proposed legislative changes that may stop Cash Converters from providing short-term cash loans. The following honourable members have sponsored e-petitions which are now closed and presented—

Kuranda Range Road Ms Lee Long, from 25 petitioners, requesting the House to construct a road tunnel instead of the proposed four-lane, multi- bridged upgrade of the Kuranda Range Road.

Needle Exchange Program Mr Langbroek, from 112 petitioners, requesting the House to relocate the Needle Exchange Program which recently opened in Burleigh Heads.

Goprint Review Mr Moorhead, from 103 petitioners, requesting the House to release the findings of the Service Delivery and Performance Commission review of Goprint before the matter is taken to the Cabinet Budget Review Committee.

Redland Shire, Boundary Changes Mr English, from 42 petitioners, requesting the House to take all necessary action to ensure no change to the boundaries of the Redland Shire.

Liquor Licences Mr Fraser, from 25 petitioners, requesting the House to amend the liquor licensing practices to enable licensing of convenience stores and supermarkets for the sale of alcohol.

Robina Hospital, Palliative Care Unit Mr Stevens, two e-petitions, from 81 petitioners in total, requesting the House to reopen the Palliative Care Unit at the Robina Hospital.

TABLED PAPERS

PAPERS TABLED DURING THE RECESS The Clerk informed the House that the following papers, received during the recess, were tabled on the dates indicated— 7 September 2007— • Local Government Electoral and Boundaries Review Commission report titled 2007 Redivision of Electoral Wards within the City of Brisbane, Final Determination, August 2007 • Response from the Minister for Natural Resources and Water and Minister Assisting the Premier in North Queensland (Mr Wallace) to a paper petition (869-07) presented by Ms Lee Long from 225 petitioners regarding the rock wall construction and reclamation of Webber Esplanade, Cooktown 09 Oct 2007 Tabled Papers 3215

• Response from the Minister for Education and Training and Minister for the Arts (Mr Welford) to a paper petition (874-07) presented by Dr Flegg from 3,757 petitioners requesting access by students in Mt Crosby, Karana Downs, Karalee and Chuwar to Kenmore State High School and planning for the construction of a new high school within the area • Department of Natural Resources and Water report titled Final Report: Millmerran Shire River Improvement Trust 1 July 2006—18 May 2007 10 September 2007— • Response from the Minister for Education and Training Minister for the Arts (Mr Welford) to a paper petition (858-07) presented by Mr Hobbs from 135 petitioners requesting funding for air conditioning in schools across south-west Queensland • Response from the Minister for Natural Resources and Water and Minister Assisting the Premier in North Queensland (Mr Wallace) to a paper petition (802-07) presented by Mr Elmes from 196 petitioners requesting a change of name for Weyba Downs to Peregian Beach West 12 September 2007— • Office of the Information Commissioner—Annual Report 2006-07 • Response from the Minister for Education and Training Minister for the Arts (Mr Welford) to a paper petition (870-07) presented by Ms Lee Long from 90 petitioners regarding the future of the old Atherton Primary School • Response from the Minister for Local Government, Planning and Sport (Mr Fraser) to an e-petition (718-06) sponsored by Mr Moorhead from 105 petitioners regarding hazardous and noxious industries near residential areas • Response from the Minister for Local Government, Planning and Sport (Mr Fraser) to a paper petition (838-07) presented by Mr Foley from 103 petitioners requesting a change of boundary to make all of Division 3 of Tiaro Shire a part of Cooloola Shire officially 13 September 2007— • Report on an overseas visit by the Minister for Transport and Main Roads (Mr Lucas) to the Sustainability-TrafiNZ Conference, New Zealand Traffic Institute, held in Taupo, New Zealand from 13-15 August 2007 17 September 2007— • Response from the Minister for Transport and Main Roads (Mr Lucas) to a paper petition (866-07) presented by Mr Foley from 622 petitioners regarding a new boat ramp and associated facilities for Burrum Heads 18 September 2007— • Seventh Annual Report of the Controlled Operations Committee delivered pursuant to the Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 19 September 2007— • Response from the Minister for Transport and Main Roads (Mr Lucas) to paper petitions (843-07 and 862-07) presented by Mr Wellington (from 42 and 169 petitioners respectively) requesting an upgrade of sections of the Nambour-Mapleton Road 20 September 2007— • Response from the Minister for Main Roads and Local Government (Mr Pitt) to an e-petition (826-07) sponsored by Mr Choi from 101 petitioners regarding potential amalgamation of Redland Shire • Response from the Minister for Police and Corrective Services (Ms Spence) to an e-petition (747-07) sponsored by Mrs Stuckey from 87 petitioners requesting an upgrade of the Nerang and Mudgeeraba Police Stations to 24 hour counter operations 25 September 2007— • Report on an overseas visit by the Minister for Health (Mr Robertson) to the USA and Canada, 9-21 August 2007 • Interim Government Response from the Minister for Transport, Trade, Employment and Industrial Relations (Mr Mickel) to Travelsafe Committee Report No. 47 titled Report on the inquiry into Q-RIDE 26 September 2007— • Auditor-General of Queensland, Report to Parliament No. 6 for 2007 Beyond Agency Risk • Response from the Minister for Sustainability, Climate Change and Innovation (Mr McNamara) to an e-petition (798-07) sponsored by Mrs Stuckey from 68 petitioners regarding the build-up of sand in and around Kirra Beach 28 September 2007— • Response from the Minister for Mines and Energy (Mr Wilson) to a paper petition (861-07) presented by Mrs Stuckey from 1,806 petitioners requesting that the proposed high voltage transmission lines between Algester and Larapinta Substations be placed underground • Response from the Minister for Education and Training Minister for the Arts (Mr Welford) to a paper petition (883-07) presented by Mr Cripps from 221 petitioners regarding teacher aide hours for prep classes in Queensland schools • Response from the Minister for Education and Training Minister for Arts (Mr Welford) to a paper petition (889-07) presented by Mr Malone from 1,010 petitioners regarding the sale of the former Sarina State Preschool Centre • Response from the Minister for Health (Mr Robertson) to an e-petition (807-07) sponsored by Mr Messenger from 53 petitioners regarding dental health treatment in the Bundaberg-Burnett region • Report by the Minister for Primary Industries and Fisheries (Mr Mulherin) pursuant to section 56A(4) of the Statutory Instruments Act 1992 regarding the Fisheries Regulation 1995 • Response from the Minister for Primary Industries and Fisheries (Mr Mulherin) to a paper petition (855-07) presented by Mr Schwarten from 2,046 petitioners regarding the law relating to net fishing in Queensland 3216 Tabled Papers 09 Oct 2007

1 October 2007— • Response from the Minister for Police, Corrective Services and Sport (Ms Spence) to an e-petition (687-06) sponsored by Mr Caltabiano from 153 petitioners requesting a ban on the sale and possession of slingshots • Letter, dated 26 September 2007, from the Premier (Ms Bligh) to the Clerk of the Parliament enclosing a copy of a letter from the Commonwealth Parliament’s Joint Standing Committee on Treaties listing proposed international treaty actions tabled in both houses of the Federal Parliament on 11 September 2007 and the National Interest Analyses for the proposed treaty actions listed • Government Response from the Minister for Transport, Trade, Employment and Industrial Relations (Mr Mickel) to Select Committee of Travelsafe Report No. 48 titled Investigation into the road safety implications of mandatory 12 hour shifts for Jilalan traincrew 2 October 2007— • Response from the Minister for Natural Resources and Water and Minister Assisting the Premier in North Queensland (Mr Wallace) to a paper petition (870-07) presented by Ms Lee Long from 90 petitioners requesting that the old Atherton Primary School remain in the hands of the State Government and be fully maintained • Response from the Minister for Main Roads and Local Government (Mr Pitt) to a paper petition (871-07) presented by Ms Lee Long from 1,697 petitioners regarding the amalgamation of four Tableland shire councils into the Tableland Regional Council • Response from the Minister for Main Roads and Local Government (Mr Pitt) to a paper petition (873-07) presented by Ms van Litsenburg from 11,113 petitioners regarding local government reform in the Redcliffe City area 3 October 2007— • Response from the Minister for Main Roads and Local Government (Mr Pitt) to a paper petition (872-07) presented by Mr English from 562 petitioners regarding the construction of a toll bridge to North Stradbroke Island via Russell Island 4 October 2007— • Response from the Minister for Main Roads and Local Government (Mr Pitt) to a paper petition (893-07) presented by Mr O’Brien from 137 petitioners regarding the recommendations of the Local Government Reform Commission • Response from the Minister for Main Roads and Local Government (Mr Pitt) to a paper petition (895-07) presented by Ms Lee Long from 286 petitioners regarding the amalgamation of four Tablelands shire councils into the Tableland Regional Council • Queensland Law Society, 2006/07 Annual Report • Reports by the Minister for Natural Resources and Water and Minister Assisting the Premier in North Queensland (Mr Wallace), pursuant to section 56A(4) of the Statutory Instruments Act 1992, in relation to the Aboriginal Land Regulation 1991, Land Regulation 1995 and Torres Strait Islander Land Regulation 1991 8 October 2007–– • Response from the Minister for Main Roads and Local Government (Mr Pitt) to a paper petition (875-07) presented by Mr O’Brien from 1,942 petitioners regarding the amalgamation of Douglas Shire Council into the Cairns Regional Council • Response from the Minister for Main Roads and Local Government (Mr Pitt) to a paper petition (856-07) presented by Mr Springborg from 3,259 petitioners regarding amalgamation of Queensland councils STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS The following statutory instruments were tabled by the Clerk— Industrial Relations Act 1999–– • Industrial Relations Amendment Regulation (No. 1) 2007, No. 220 Forestry Act 1959, Nature Conservation Act 1992–– • Forestry and Nature Conservation Legislation Amendment Regulation (No. 3) 2007, No. 221 Exotic Diseases in Animals Act 1981–– • Exotic Diseases in Animals (Equine Influenza) Notice 2007, No. 222 Commissions of Inquiry Act 1950–– • Commissions of Inquiry (Fuel Subsidy Inquiry—Evidence) Regulation 2007, No. 223 Service Delivery and Performance Commission Act 2005–– • Service Delivery and Performance Commission Regulation 2007, No. 224 Superannuation (State Public Sector) Act 1990–– • Superannuation (State Public Sector) Amendment of Deed Regulation (No. 2) 2007, No. 225 Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995–– • Transport Legislation Amendment Regulation (No. 2) 2007, No. 226 Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995–– • Transport Operations (Road Use Management—Driver Licensing Transitional) Regulation 2007, No. 227 Transport Legislation Amendment Act 2005–– • Proclamation commencing remaining provision, No. 228 Transport Legislation and Another Act Amendment Act 2007–– • Proclamation commencing certain provisions, No. 229 State Penalties Enforcement Act 1999–– • State Penalties Enforcement Amendment Regulation (No. 3) 2007, No. 230 09 Oct 2007 Ministerial Statements 3217

Keno Act 1996–– • Keno Rule 2007, No. 231 Agricultural Chemicals Distribution Control Act 1966, Animal Care and Protection Act 2001, Apiaries Act 1982, Brands Act 1915, Chemical Usage (Agricultural and Veterinary) Control Act 1988, Drugs Misuse Act 1986, Food Production (Safety) Act 2000, Land Protection (Pest and Stock Route Management) Act 2002, Stock Act 1915, Timber Utilisation and Marketing Act 1987, Veterinary Surgeons Act 1936–– • Primary Industries Legislation Amendment Regulation (No. 2) 2007, No. 232 Exotic Diseases in Animals Act 1981–– • Exotic Diseases in Animals (Equine Influenza) Amendment Notice (No. 1) 2007, No. 233 Exotic Diseases in Animals Act 1981–– • Exotic Diseases in Animals Amendment Regulation (No. 1) 2007, No. 234 Urban Land Development Authority Act 2007–– • Proclamation commencing certain provisions, No. 235 Land Court and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2007–– • Proclamation commencing remaining provisions, No. 236 Fair Trading Act 1989–– • Interim Prohibition Order pursuant to s85A(1) prohibiting the supply of dangerous goods or undesirable goods (children’s toys having accessible materials with a lead migration level greater than 90 mg/kg of lead) Government Owned Corporations Act 1993–– • Government Owned Corporations (Bundaberg Port Authority Wind-up) Regulation 2007, No. 237 Transport Infrastructure Act 1994–– • Transport Infrastructure (Ports) Amendment Regulation (No. 1) 2007, No. 238 Stock Act 1915–– • Stock Identification Amendment Regulation (No. 1) 2007, No. 239 Security Providers Amendment Act 2007–– • Proclamation commencing certain provisions, No. 240 Justice and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2007–– • Proclamation commencing certain provisions, No. 241 Water Act 2000–– • Water Resource (Logan Basin) Amendment Plan (No. 1) 2007, No. 242 Aboriginal Land Act 1991–– • Aboriginal Land Amendment Regulation (No. 1) 2007, No. 243 Exotic Diseases in Animals Act 1981, Stock Act 1915–– • Exotic Diseases in Animals and Other Legislation Amendment Regulation (No. 1) 2007, No. 244 Health Practitioners (Special Events Exemption) Act 1998— • Health Practitioners (Special Events Exemption) Amendment Regulation (No. 1) 2007, No. 245

MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS

Afghanistan, Death of Trooper David Pearce Hon. AM BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Premier) (9.36 am): I know that the Leader of the Opposition and all members of the House will join with me this morning in expressing our sympathy to the family and friends of an Australian soldier killed in Afghanistan. The loss of any young life is a tragedy, but the loss of a young man in the service of his country is of special significance. This morning an Australian family is mourning the death of a soldier serving in the Australian Defence Force in Afghanistan. This fallen soldier is the first Australian to be killed in direct enemy attacks in Afghanistan or Iraq. The soldier, as yet not publicly identified, was one of almost 1,000 troops in Afghanistan as part of the NATO-led ISAF. His death is a tragic reminder of the perils the men and women of our defence forces face. Our thoughts are with his family, his friends and his colleagues. We also recognise those who are continuing their work protecting the engineers who are responsible for the reconstruction work in Afghanistan. Our thoughts also go out to the dead soldier’s colleague who was wounded in the same attack. This is a tragic day for the Australian Defence Force and the families of our soldiers. They will all be in our thoughts today. 3218 Ministerial Statements 09 Oct 2007

Ministerial Arrangements Hon. AM BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Premier) (9.37 am): I wish to inform the House that on 13 September 2007, in accordance with the Constitution of Queensland 2001, Her Excellency the Governor appointed: me as Premier of Queensland; the Hon. Paul Thomas Lucas as Deputy Premier and Minister for Infrastructure and Planning; the Hon. Judith Caroline Spence as Minister for Police, Corrective Services and Sport; the Hon. Andrew Peter Fraser as Treasurer; the Hon. Reginald John Mickel as Minister for Transport, Trade, Employment and Industrial Relations; the Hon. Frederick Warren Pitt as Minister for Main Roads and Local Government; the Hon. Margaret Majella Keech as Minister for Child Safety and Minister for Women; the Hon. Desley Carole Boyle as Minister for Tourism, Regional Development and Industry; the Hon. Lindel Helena Nelson-Carr as Minister for Communities, Minister for Disability Services, Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Partnerships, Minister for Multicultural Affairs, Seniors and Youth; and the Hon. Andrew Ian McNamara as Minister for Sustainability, Climate Change and Innovation. On 13 September 2007, Her Excellency the Governor also appointed 11 members of my government as parliamentary secretaries to various ministers. I also inform the House that, in accordance with the Constitution of Queensland 2001, Her Excellency the Governor, acting by and with the advice of the Executive Council, on 13 September 2007 approved Administrative Arrangements Order (No. 2) 2007 and Departmental Arrangements Notice (No. 4) 2007; and on 21 September 2007 approved Administrative Arrangements Order (No. 3) 2007 and Departmental Arrangements (No. 5) 2007. I lay upon the table of the House copies of the relevant notifications from the Queensland Government Gazette that provide specific details on the ministerial and parliamentary secretary appointments and orders and notices that I have outlined.

Tabled paper: Queensland Government Gazette, Vol. 346, No. 9, dated 13 September 2007. Tabled paper: Queensland Government Gazette, Vol. 346, No. 23, dated 21 September 2007. Bligh Labor Government Hon. AM BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Premier) (9.40 am): On 13 September I was sworn in as Premier of Queensland. I am humbled by the support of my colleagues and of the support I have received from many Queenslanders in the past weeks. But I am also acutely aware of the responsibility that this position brings with it. On being sworn in I committed to keep Queensland the best state in Australia. Here in this place today I recommit myself to that pledge to keep Queensland the best place to live and raise a family, a great place to work and to do business, a great place to visit and enjoy and to keep Queensland ahead of the pack. I identified a number of clear priorities for my government and I want the opportunity to briefly outline those today. Firstly, a strong economy. It is the strength and the growth of the Queensland economy that creates jobs and creates opportunities. It generates the capacity for us to build our roads, our schools and our hospitals and to create great futures for our children. A strong economy will remain my top priority in this new position. Secondly, education. Modern economies are fuelled by education, knowledge and skills. Education has been a personal passion of mine and has been at the heart of our government for nine years and this will continue under my premiership. Investing in the early years is critical to later success. And now, following our efforts in the prep year, it is time to turn our attention to those early years before school begins. Thirdly, managing growth. Growth is our biggest challenge and our best opportunity. Our task is to manage it and to stay one step ahead of it. I want the building of our infrastructure—our roads, rail, ports, energy, schools and hospitals and, most urgent of all, water infrastructure to be one of the hallmarks of my premiership. In relation to transport, there will be a stronger focus on our transport system as an early priority of my government. Later this morning I will be outlining initiatives in this regard. In relation to health, many of our services are experiencing pressure due to high demand. Health and ambulance services are key areas where meeting demand will be paramount. Our Health Action Plan is beginning to see results, but there is much more to be done. For example, bringing online the extra beds we committed to in the 2006 election and building three new tertiary hospitals are among our biggest tasks. Preventing injury and disease will also be a priority for our government. Queensland’s investment in our Ambulance Service is the highest per person in Australia. Clearly we need to be working harder to see that investment reflected in service quality. Concerns in this area have already received my attention with the establishment of an audit and the development of a new roster system. 09 Oct 2007 Ministerial Statements 3219

Climate change looms as a critical issue on the horizon for all of us. I have initiated a new portfolio to put a new emphasis on this long-term challenge to ensure a sustainable future for our state. Finally, on becoming Premier I outlined the importance of regions to Queensland’s economy and to our future development. Growing Queensland’s regions is the key to our economic strength. It is also a key to managing our population growth. I want more of those people who are moving to Queensland to move to regional Queensland. I have already renewed our focus in this area with the shape of my ministry, with half of the cabinet from outside of the metropolitan area and a dedicated ministry for regional development held by a minister from a Queensland region. I have wanted a greater focus on the regions, and the best way to achieve this is to get out there and meet Queenslanders face to face. Since my appointment as Premier I have travelled to Townsville, Charleville, Rockhampton, the Gold and Sunshine coasts, Cairns, Toowoomba, Mount Isa, Burketown, Normanton, Karumba and Mornington Island. I will continue, along with my colleagues, to be out there talking to regional Queenslanders. I have also clearly stated my government’s position in relation to daylight saving. It will not be considered by our government. There might be benefits for those in the south-east, but it is not welcomed beyond that. This will not be a matter I return to. In concluding this statement, I pay tribute to former Premier Peter Beattie. Queensland, without a doubt, is a better place because of Peter Beattie. His every waking moment in the nine years, two months and 18 days that he served as the Premier was about making Queensland a better place. Some scoffed at his Smart State mantra. After all, a decade or so ago we were still the butt of jokes from southern states. But in less than a decade Peter Beattie’s Smart State agenda has turned the Queensland brain drain into a brain gain. Today, be it our economy or our work in research and education fields, the arts or on the sporting field, we are regularly leading the nation. Be it cutting unemployment from 8.9 per cent to 3.5 per cent, long overdue education reforms, a virtual rebuilding of the health system, setting about the righting of shameful Indigenous wrongs, making a quantum leap in funding and support for Child Safety and Disability Services, expanding our scientific research capabilities to be among the world’s best, developing a nation-leading school based apprenticeship system or putting in place multibillion-dollar long-term water security programs, Peter Beattie gave it his all. Peter will be remembered as one of the most influential, forward thinking and successful state premiers in Australian history. On behalf of the people of Queensland, I thank Peter for his wonderful service to Queensland and his contribution to the public life of our state and I am sure that others will join me in wishing him well in the future with his wife, Heather, and his family.

Transit Authority

Hon. AM BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Premier) (9.43 am): We are experiencing prosperous times. We have low unemployment, rapid industrial expansion and an economy that is growing at a rate that constantly outstrips the rest of Australia. Our state has never been more popular. Every day around an extra 200 people call Queensland home. This growth brings with it many opportunities. However, it also brings many challenges and, as I said earlier, we need to stay one step ahead of those challenges and we need to plan for the future. That is why when I was sworn in as Premier I committed my government to work harder to identify the pressure points in essential services and develop strategies to help to ease that pressure. One key area that I committed to tackle was urban congestion here in the south-east corner. That is why today I am announcing a significant and serious shake-up of public transport services. Firstly, we will move to create a new stand-alone statutory authority that will coordinate and improve public transport services across south-east Queensland. This new authority will build on the work of TransLink but it will go much further. With this move we will create one authority to manage and coordinate the myriad 17 different bus, ferry and other public transport service providers that currently service the south-east corner—one authority to deal with customer needs and complaints, one authority to provide better and more efficient public transport services, one authority with real grunt to provide better coordination and integration of service. Secondly, we will take Queensland Rail passenger services, incorporating the Citytrain and Traveltrain division, and structurally separate them from the rest of QR’s operations. The new entity will have primary responsibility for delivering improved rail passenger services and ensuring a renewed customer service focus for our passengers. Its services will be contracted by the new transit authority. The focus of this new entity will be solely on passenger services, unlike current arrangements in which QR passenger services are just one part of a much larger organisation that incorporates other businesses such as freight and coal. This will allow the other parts of Queensland Rail to clearly delineate between their separate businesses and focus on their continued expansion into the national freight and coal markets. This is good news for rail passengers in the south-east corner; it is also good news for rail passengers all across Queensland. We will seek the input of south-east Queensland mayors, unions and service providers on the development of the new transit authority. After public consultation we expect to have the new authority up and running by July next year. 3220 Ministerial Statements 09 Oct 2007

The current system relies on different operators in different areas to undertake their own scheduling. There is only minimal integration. Customers do not know where the buck stops because there is no single point of coordination and accountability. The authority will be one point of contact for timetables, complaints and feedback. It will also have the capacity to coordinate the deployment of buses, trains and ferries to meet peak demand in locations right across the region. It will be a one-stop shop that will provide better and improved services for customers. There is more to be done but we are about putting the customer—the passenger—at the heart of our public transport system. This new initiative will build on the work we have already done to build a better public transport system here in south-east Queensland. We have allocated close to $10 billion over the next 20 years to improve public transport infrastructure.

Within the region the government is spending more than $950 million on bus, train and ferry services this year alone, and this year we are funding 148 buses which will deliver an extraordinary 5,000 extra services every week. Four years ago we created TransLink. Since then, TransLink has successfully implemented integrated ticketing, provided additional services including 500 new buses, and it is rolling out the smart card system. In that time patronage has grown by an extraordinary 30 per cent and trips have increased from 119 million per year to more than 160 million per annum.

Our growing population is putting pressure on our roads and our transport system. Urban congestion is bad for business, it is bad for the environment, and at the end of the day it robs commuters of precious time with their families. The new transit authority and the restructure of Queensland Rail will help us to meet the challenges of this growth. Public transport is not the only part of the solution to urban congestion but it is an absolutely critical part of getting it right. This is a major reform and it will deliver a simpler and more convenient system for passengers who should be at the heart of our public transport system.

Equine Influenza

Hon. AM BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Premier) (9.51 am): The outbreak of equine influenza has been an economic body blow to thousands of Queenslanders who depend on the state’s diverse horse industry for their living. Although losses incurred by Queensland’s horse racing industry have dominated media coverage, my government is acutely aware that the pain is far more widespread and has ensured that help is being delivered where it is needed most. I want to assure members that assistance is getting through to families and individuals who are suffering hardship, and I urge anyone in difficulty to contact the equine influenza hotline on 132523 or to visit one of the state government’s network of one-stop shops. In the past week the government’s one- stop shops in Brisbane, the Gold Coast and Toowoomba, and nine mobile units targeting equine influenza hot spots, have provided $120,000 in one-off grants to more than 500 people struggling to afford basics such as food, clothing and medical expenses or their rent. All of these shops are open every day, and in the past week units have been mobilised to help people in Rosewood, Tamborine, Gympie, Landsborough, Caboolture, Warwick, Ipswich and Rocklea. As well, more than 1,250 people have contacted the hotline for help in the past 10 days, and we will use these calls to direct the mobile units to where the help is needed. The government response has been coordinated by a high-level task force chaired by my director-general, Ken Smith, that includes representation from government and industry. As of last Friday the task force has been joined by RNA President, Dr Vivian Edwards, who will ensure that the thousands of people in the non-racing horse industry have a direct voice at the highest levels. I thank Dr Edwards for his participation and assistance. Already his presence has helped to ensure that the non- racing industry is also at the forefront of the response. Queensland Racing has advised that an economic impact statement being quantified by PricewaterhouseCoopers will now be broadened to include all sections of the horse industry. This information is being collated for a potential class action against the federal government in relation to this insidious disease entering Australia. On another front, I am pleased to inform the House that following my direct appeal to the Prime Minister in the last couple of days, the federal government has resolved to make an additional 17,000 doses of vaccine available to high-value breeding horses in the racing and non-racing sectors. The first priority is to vaccinate horses that make a significant contribution to the economy and to people’s livelihoods. As in the case with our overall response to equine influenza, we will not favour one group over another but we will work to take a common-sense, responsible approach that will prepare the way for a quicker economic recovery for the broader equine industry. 09 Oct 2007 Ministerial Statements 3221

Transit Authority

Hon. RJ MICKEL (Logan—ALP) (Minister for Transport, Trade, Employment and Industrial Relations) (9.53 am): The Transit Authority announced today by the Premier is part of our strategy for helping address the challenges of urban traffic congestion in south-east Queensland. The authority will be responsible for contracting bus, rail and ferry services across the TransLink network. It will not be taking over the operations of any existing government or private-public transport providers. The new authority will be overseen by a highly qualified and experienced board, chief executive and management. The authority will report to me as the accountable minister. To ensure the best possible level of service for customers, we will review the structure of Queensland Rail Citytrain to ensure we get the best use out of the rail network. We will not be privatising QR Citytrain. We will, however, be investigating alternative models for Citytrain to ensure that the role of rail is optimised in delivering improved services under contract to the new authority. This will be done in consultation with Queensland Rail and the relevant unions. Bus passengers can also look forward to improved services. The extra flexibility possible under the transit authority means buses could potentially be redeployed quickly to meet shifting demand. The authority will also present a single brand name for all services, infrastructure and passenger information, making the network easier to use, especially for new customers. The core functions of the authority are expected to include overseeing public transport service contracts, integrated service scheduling, service planning and customer services. A steering committee will be established to oversee the transition of the new authority. That committee will consult key stakeholders such as local government, operators and unions. The committee will report to cabinet in early 2008 on the preferred model and structure of the authority, with a proposed commencement date of 1 July 2008. As the Premier said—and I support her totally—fighting traffic congestion is a top priority for her government. The creation of the transit authority will provide us with a powerful weapon in that fight.

Infrastructure and Planning

Hon. PT LUCAS (Lytton—ALP) (Deputy Premier and Minister for Infrastructure and Planning) (9.56 am): More than any other, Queensland is Australia’s land of opportunity—and the rest of the country knows it. That is why every 5½ minutes we welcome a new Queenslander. It equates to a population increase of about 1,800 people every single week. As the nation’s fastest growing state and its economic powerhouse, building infrastructure now and planning for the future has never been more important. That is why the Queensland government has united the departments of infrastructure and planning as one single entity. It demonstrates that we are committed to not just building the major projects today but also planning smartly for subsequent generations of Queenslanders. It demonstrates that we are committed to results, to preserving the lifestyle and economic growth that makes this state the envy of the rest of what we call the ‘lucky country’. Honourable members would know that in my former role as Minister for Transport and Main Roads I was passionate about delivering infrastructure as well as smart planning for the Queensland of the future. For example, when the federal government announced last month that it would match the state government’s funding for the Pacific Motorway, Queensland was able to immediately call for tenders to build the upgrade. We already had the plans sitting on the shelf, waiting for the federal government’s cash contribution. It is a vital lesson for Canberra. While the federal government’s announcement last week of $800 million for the Bruce Highway in north Queensland is welcome, it is well overdue and not enough. Unfortunately, the north will have to wait years to see the benefits. For two years I have pleaded with the federal government for money to plan and design the new work on the Bruce Highway. It ignored the request. For a relatively modest funding outlay, we already have the plans and the ability to send in the bulldozers now rather than start work two years from now. Smart planning delivers results—it is that simple. The Beattie government was, and the Bligh government is, obsessed with infrastructure. In my old portfolio we are spending more than $100 million a week building and maintaining road, rail and transport infrastructure across Queensland. And we are spending more than $9 billion building south- east Queensland’s water grid. In comparison we have had 11 years of a federal government that has delivered no plan to build major projects, has no commitment, and has no idea about the importance of planning and infrastructure. For more than a decade, the federal government has been missing in action and then we see a few Johnny-come-lately promises in desperation just ahead of an election. Just like the federal government, the state opposition is missing in action. We have a 20-year infrastructure plan. It is long on rhetoric but short on action. We are getting on with the job of building the water grid. The opposition is opposing it every step of the way. 3222 Ministerial Statements 09 Oct 2007

Queensland knows about planning for the future—the South East Queensland Regional Plan and Program, with its rolling 20-year time frame, makes sure we are providing certainty that in turn attracts new businesses to this state and allows business and government to plan for the future. Last week we began asking residents of the far north to put forward their ideas for the draft Far North Queensland 2025 Regional Plan, due in April 2008. This $3.7 million plan will manage the region’s rapid growth in a sustainable fashion to preserve its unique lifestyle and natural heritage. I am delighted to be the new minister for this portfolio. In my few weeks in the role, I have already been able to see firsthand strong examples of how this government is delivering on Queenslanders’ needs. The creation of the new Urban Development Land Authority will make sure that housing is more affordable for all. The UDLA will change the way we develop our urban areas with a key focus on putting home ownership within the reach of more Queenslanders. More importantly, I have inspected work on much of the nation’s biggest water infrastructure project. No other state is building a water grid. It is a must-do project if we are to provide water security for the Queensland of today and the future. Without it, the taps could slow to a trickle along with our stand-out economic growth. I am well aware that Queensland is a big state. It is 2,043 kilometres from top to bottom. I fully intend to be a Deputy Premier who looks after the needs of all Queenslanders, not just those in the state’s south-east corner. I look forward to visiting other parts of the state shortly so that I can hear of their needs firsthand.

Equine Influenza Hon. TS MULHERIN (Mackay—ALP) (Minister for Primary Industries and Fisheries) (9.59 am): Responding to the equine influenza outbreak is a huge task. We have nearly 700 people involved in the response, performing all the tasks required on the way to eradicating horse flu for the benefit of all Queensland horse owners and industries. Almost half are DPIF employees while the remainder are staff from other Queensland government agencies, contract or temporary staff and some who have come from interstate to assist. There is no shortage of veterinarians involved in the response. Biosecurity Queensland has 53 vets on staff. There are also 106 private vets engaged to conduct investigations of sick horses. We have had some tremendous successes in the response to date. The standstill was a success, and that is one of the reasons the area of the state affected by equine influenza is relatively small. The infected clusters cover an area of less than one per cent of our state. The red zone has been a success. We have managed to contain the problem within that boundary, which is amazing when we consider that the virus is so contagious and so easy to spread. It is also very important to understand that our response is being managed nationally. What we are doing is not simply Queensland’s idea of how it should be done. We are following the advice of the best veterinarians in the country, including those from our own state. Organisations such as the Queensland Horse Council, Queensland Racing, Queensland Harness Racing, the Australian Veterinary Association, the Local Government Association of Queensland and AgForce have been involved in weekly meetings with government, including the Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries, about our response. We have an eradication strategy based on a pre-existing, planned response for this disease—a strategy that has the full support of the Australian Veterinary Association. The strategy for the eradication of equine influenza is based on a combination of rigorous movement restrictions; strategic vaccination, in particular, the creation of a buffer zone around the south-east; and promoting good biosecurity practices. The Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries, with the help of industry and the public, are diligently and efficiently getting on with the job.

Queensland Ambulance Service Hon. N ROBERTS (Nudgee—ALP) (Minister for Emergency Services) (10.01 am): Ambulance services in Queensland are responding to increasing demands. The Queensland Ambulance Service has a record budget of $404.4 million this year with funding for an extra 250 ambulance officers. Last month the Premier and I announced an audit of the Queensland Ambulance Service. Comprehensive terms of reference have been developed, and I table those terms of reference.

Tabled paper: Document, undated, titled ‘Audit of the Queensland Ambulance Service’. The audit will help us to ensure that the Queensland Ambulance Service operates efficiently and effectively. It will benchmark the Queensland Ambulance Service with services across Australia. Specifically, the audit will look at how increasing demands for ambulance services are managed, how resources are allocated to get the best value for money for taxpayers, how the workforce is managed to best meet the workload and how the Ambulance Service works with the health system. I can report that significant progress has already been made. 09 Oct 2007 Ministerial Statements 3223

The government has announced that it has accepted a recommendation for a new 12-hour roster system at the state’s busiest ambulance stations and communication centres. Currently, officers at Queensland’s 90 24-hour, seven-day-a-week stations are working 10-hour shifts. Under the new system there will be a core roster comprising two 12-hour day shifts and two 12-hour night shifts, effectively giving paramedics four days on and four days off. This will result in paramedics having more consecutive days off more regularly. I was pleased to read today’s Gold Coast Bulletin, which reported— Gold Coast ambulance workers are ‘over the moon’ about a proposed rostering system that would give them more consecutive days off. That is consistent with feedback that I have received across the state over the past couple of days. Another feature of the proposed roster system is a mechanism to minimise the impact of shift overruns where paramedics are called out on jobs towards the end of their shift. These new roster arrangements have been negotiated between the Queensland Ambulance Service and the Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Workers Union. The ambulance commissioner and the union issued a joint statement on roster reform yesterday, and I table that joint statement. Tabled paper: Copy of a joint statement, dated 8 October 2007, by the Commissioner, Queensland Ambulance Service, and the Secretary, Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Union titled ‘Roster Reform Evaluation Outcomes’. I look forward to the rollout of the new roster system in the new year. It will provide a better work/ life balance for our ambulance officers. In combination with the implementation of the 38-hour week on 1 October, the new roster system will mean our ambulance officers will effectively receive nine weeks leave, made up of annual leave and accrued time off, each year. These initiatives demonstrate that the government is responding to the needs of our ambulance officers and to the needs of Queenslanders who use the service. QPRIME; Random Breath Tests Hon. JC SPENCE (Mount Gravatt—ALP) (Minister for Police, Corrective Services and Sport) (10.04 am): The Queensland Police Service is currently undertaking the largest information technology project in the organisation’s history. Honourable members have heard me speak previously about the implementation of QPRIME in this House and I have explained how this excellent new program will replace 234 information systems currently in place with a single point of access to almost 20 years of intelligence and data. While the opposition has taken a negative approach to this great technological advancement for the Queensland Police Service, the evidence continues to show that this is a success story. In the past two months, as part of the implementation of phase 2.1, an incredible volume of data has been converted from the original CRISP system and the Domestic Violence Index into the new system. These figures show just how successful the implementation has been. Files on 5.8 million occurrences have been transferred into the system. As well as that, 4.3 million person records, almost nine million person descriptions, 9.7 million property items, 25.5 million reports and almost 63 million involvements have now been brought across into the new system. This data conversion process provides the police with unprecedented access to information in a single source, culminated with the successful conversion of 255 million file lines of data. Police have done a great job of ensuring this conversion process has run smoothly, with minimal impact on users of the system. The implementation of QPRIME is a huge job for the Queensland Police Service. However, this new system will ensure police are able to do their job more efficiently in the future, allowing them to spend more time out on the beat, fighting crime in the community. The role of police officers is an evolving one, and our police service must continue to embrace new technologies that apply to policing in the 21st century. I congratulate police officers who have adapted to this change and who are working to develop their knowledge of the system to make the most of this excellent new technology. There has been a lot of talk over the past couple of days about so-called ‘political’ quotas that police have to meet when they are performing random breath tests. Let me now explain exactly where a so-called quota came from. In January 1997, the Travelsafe Committee, then chaired by the Liberal Party with a majority membership of the Liberal and National parties, made this recommendation. Recommendation 1 states— While ensuring that RBT best practice, as outlined in this report, is adhered to, the intensity of the RBT program should be increased in all police regions so that a ratio of tests to licensed drivers of 0.7:1 is achieved by 1998; and a ratio of 1:1 is achieved by the year 2000. Since 1997, Queensland police have endeavoured to take on this recommendation and complete the number of breath tests to equal the number of registered drivers in this state. These are not quotas, as has been commonly reported in the media. But they are performance targets and I think it is reasonable that our police officers, like any other organisation, have performance targets to guide their work. If a region does not meet the required performance target there is no punishment. The police service acknowledges that if a particular district is experiencing a problem with a particular type of crime—for example, break and enters—that increased effort should go into solving that problem, and 3224 Ministerial Statements 09 Oct 2007 random breath testing might suffer in that district for a period of time as a result. Today I would like to table random breath test figures for each region in Queensland for the last five years. I draw attention to the south-east region, which managed to reach its target in only one of the last five years. Tabled paper: Media release, dated 8 October 2007, by the Queensland Police Service titled ‘Random Breath Testing Figures’. This is the region that includes Logan and the Gold Coast. Rather than any police officer being punished, we have seen the two district officers in that region promoted in the last 12 months. In fact what it does show is that some regions are not only very good at meeting their targets but also incredibly good at exceeding their targets year after year after year. If police are doing the wrong thing and faking their random breath test results then they are acting dishonestly and we do not want them in the service. The commissioner has launched an independent investigation into these very serious allegations and has asked the CMC to overview this investigation. Whether or not this practice of deception is occurring, the fact is that the number of people caught drink driving in Queensland exceeds that of New South Wales and Victoria. Last year more than 34,000 Queenslanders were caught drink driving. In comparison, in New South Wales, which has a much greater population, only 25,000 drivers were caught last year. The fact is that our police are doing a very good job of catching anyone who thinks they can get away with drinking and driving in this state. Finally, I want to correct a statement made in the Courier-Mail today which claims that the chairman of the Travelsafe Committee offered immunity to officers willing to testify before his committee. This morning I spoke with Mr Pearce and he tells me that he did not make that statement and acknowledged that his committee would not have the power to offer any such immunity. Queensland Economy Hon. AP FRASER (Mount Coot-tha—ALP) (Treasurer) (10.10 am): As the Premier has affirmed this morning, prudent economic management remains at the core of this government. The latest Queensland state accounts show our economy has continued to strengthen, outperforming the rest of the nation, with continued job creation and population growth that both underpins and reinforces our economic success. The March 2007 quarter accounts show that year on year annual economic growth in Queensland strengthened to an eight-year high of 6.6 per cent in trend terms. It is clear that we can expect a final figure for fiscal 2007 that checks in above the original budget forecast of 5.5 per cent. Much is made of the performance of the Australian economy, but the national benchmark of 2.8 per cent is in the shade of our towering success—as it has been for the past 11 years. It is the composition of this growth, however, not the headline figure or the mere fact of it which reveals why we have been out in front and, more importantly, why we are positioned to remain in front. Investment has been a major driver of overall economic growth in recent years. Business investment surged by 19.1 per cent in 2006-07, reaching nearly $30 billion, more than double its level five years earlier. While much attention has been given to a surge in mining related investment, mining directly accounted for just 12 per cent of business investment in 2006-07. Our growth is broad based and diversified. This is the realisation of the Smart State vision. The latest Access Economics investment monitor shows Queensland had the highest level of non-mining investment projects under construction or in the pipeline in the June quarter, at $87.9 billion. That is $87.9 billion worth of future capacity within our economy ready to provide the future path of prosperity. Our prosperity has seen rising household incomes and population growth encouraging sustained investment across many other sectors, including retail and commercial property. Housing investment rose by 10.1 per cent compared with growth of only 1.4 per cent in the rest of Australia. I spoke recently at the HIA industry breakfast where the story of our construction sector remains optimistic. Continued population and income growth, besides sustained buoyancy in property prices, has underpinned strong growth in consumer spending in the state—despite increases in interest rates from a federal government that pledges long and checks-in short. Retail spending rose by 11.4 per cent over the year to August 2007 compared with 6.1 per cent in the rest of the country. On the trade front exports continue to expand. With both the domestic and trade sectors of the economy performing strongly, Queensland has recorded significant job gains. The trend unemployment rate in Queensland reached 3.5 per cent in August 2007, representing the lowest on record in the 29 years of these statistics. Our challenge then is to extend this path of prosperity by continuing to build the platform for sustainable growth with prudent investment in capacity. To continue the story of our unbridled economic success requires of us a deference to our fiscal history and an acceptance of the unique armoury provided to us to confront the challenges of the next phase in the development of this state. We must take the broader lesson here and not merely luxuriate in our immediate prosperity. Our growth is our greatest opportunity and our greatest challenge. It is a challenge which this government is geared to meet. 09 Oct 2007 Ministerial Statements 3225

Department of Public Works Hon. RE SCHWARTEN (Rockhampton—ALP) (Minister for Public Works, Housing and Information and Communication Technology) (10.14 am): Since this Labor government was first elected in 1998, as the minister for public works I have delivered more than $8.5 billion worth of construction and maintenance projects. With the seamless and, might I add, historic and politically unique transition from the Beattie Labor government to the Bligh Labor government, it is important that Queenslanders note that the Department of Public Works continues to focus on positive outcomes. The Department of Public Works is getting on with the job of building tomorrow’s Queensland in a very competitive marketplace. Just a snapshot of the projects on the books of the Department of Public Works either underway or planned to commence over the next 12 months amounts to $7 billion worth of work—hospitals, schools, public housing, courts, sports facilities, correctional facilities and the list goes on. These are real projects creating in excess of 54,000 real jobs for Queenslanders. Nearing completion is the $160 million Skilled Park at Robina on the Gold Coast which I understand the sports minister inspected the other day. Ms Spence interjected. Mr SCHWARTEN: I take that interjection. It will create up to 2,000 jobs over the life of the project. It is due for completion in time for the start of the 2008 NRL season. Last week the Premier announced Baulderstone Hornibrook as the successful contractor for the $63.3 million Tank Street Bridge with work now underway. At Runcorn work is continuing on the $52 million Queensland State Archives extension. At Tennyson the $82 million State Tennis Centre is well underway and will be complete in December 2008. Members will have noted the success of the $120 million Asbestos Roof Replacement Program run by the Department of Public Works and reported on earlier. Providing facilities for the $277 million preparatory year of schooling program continues, producing jobs right across Queensland. The Department of Public Works creates employment for Queenslanders on jobs big and small. Last month, Project Services accepted tenders for $15 million worth of work around the state and advertised for another $53 million worth of work. An incident having occurred in the chamber— Mr SCHWARTEN: It is not me singing, Mr Speaker, I can give you the tip. For the month of September Q-Build accepted tenders to the value of $5 million, creating jobs in regional, rural and metropolitan areas.

Health Funding Hon. S ROBERTSON (Stretton—ALP) (Minister for Health) (10.17 am): Since becoming health minister a little over two years ago, I have publicly expressed my disappointment a number of times over the Commonwealth’s refusal to pull its weight regarding health. New figures released just a few days ago prove it has actually been walking away from public hospitals for the past 10 years. The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare report has let the cat out of the bag. It shows the Howard government has decreased its share of public hospital funding in Australia from 45 per cent to 41 per cent since 1996. Funding of our public hospitals is supposed to be a fifty-fifty partnership between the Commonwealth and the states, but we can expect this inequity to become worse over the next year. By the time the current Australian Health Care Agreement expires next year, the Queensland government will be investing 65c for every dollar spent on public health services in Queensland while the Commonwealth’s contribution will be a pathetic 35c. It means Canberra will have short-changed our public hospitals to the tune of $2.6 billion over the life of the current Australian Health Care Agreement. That is why it was refreshing to hear the AMA last weekend publicly call on the Howard government to restore the fifty-fifty partnership. President Rosanna Capolingua said that it must match the states’ contribution in their next funding agreement and take more responsibility for the problems in the health system. That was in Saturday’s Gold Coast Bulletin. In the Sunshine Coast Daily Dr Capolingua said— It needs to be 50:50 matched. And it needs not a dropping down of the states to match 50% but an elevation of the federal government component of funding. I could not agree more. The state government is implementing a five-year $10 billion Health Action Plan, which commenced in 2005-06. This year’s state health budget is a massive $7.15 billion— more than double the $3.4 billion invested in 1997-98. This increased commitment is in stark contrast to the Commonwealth. Mr Howard’s response to his funding neglect and failure to supply enough Australian trained doctors over the past decade is to blame the states and go back to the future with its plan to reinstate hospital boards that will do nothing to address the chronic shortage of doctors in Australia which is the sole responsibility of the Howard government. 3226 Ministerial Statements 09 Oct 2007

Mr SPEAKER: Before calling the next minister, I indicate to the House that the groan we heard before was actually from a mobile phone. I am sure members would agree with me that we do not want to share those groans or whatever else on those phones, so please turn your mobile phones off. It is a pleasure that I now call the Minister for Sustainability, Climate Change and Innovation. Climate Change Hon. AI McNAMARA (Hervey Bay—ALP) (Minister for Sustainability, Climate Change and Innovation) (10.20 am): Sustainability is the great challenge of our times. Our efforts in finding a way to live sustainably will determine the living standards not just of people now but of all generations that follow after us. Sustainability includes two key challenges that we must confront, and they are resource security and climate change. Put simply, we must find a way to sustainably draw upon the earth’s resources of oil, coal, gas, wood and water, but we must also find a way to safely put back into the earth the by-products of that use. They are of course two sides of the same coin, and the coin is called sustainability. We must live sustainably in what we take from the earth to feed ourselves and to power our cities, and we must recognise and address the danger of how we deal with the waste from products from that use. Today I want to place on record in my first ministerial statement some of the steps that the Queensland government is taking to face these challenges. The creation by Premier Bligh of the new portfolio of Sustainability, Climate Change and Innovation, for which I am very proud to be the minister, is a very important first step in recognising the fight that we have on our hands. The Queensland government is taking proactive measures such as the establishment of the Climate Change Centre of Excellence—the first of its kind in Australia—and the release of the Climate Smart Adaptation Plan and ClimateSmart 2050 earlier this year. Just last week the CSIRO released a report with the Bureau of Meteorology, Climate change in Australia, which should act as a call to arms for all politicians in Australia—indeed, not just governments but oppositions. The report confirms yet again that climate change impacts due to existing greenhouse gas emissions are affecting the atmosphere. The Howard government’s obstinate and ignorant refusal for 11 of its 11½ years to even acknowledge climate change, let alone deal with it, will be its political epitaph when it is consigned to the dustbin of history over the next six weeks. John Howard rejected climate change, and now the climate for change will reject him. I take this opportunity to call on those opposite and indeed all members of this House to work with the Bligh government, to put aside partisanship and point-scoring and to genuinely seek solutions to the issues of sustainability. Every member of this place represents a community dependent on agricultural or marine industries. Every member has the privilege to represent Queenslanders who are reliant on clean river systems, secure liquid fuel supplies or our wonderful coastline for their economic and social existence. This is not someone else’s problem. Sustainability is the global issue, but we must start locally and lead by example, as the threats posed by climate change and peak oil are now upon us. I look forward to the support of all members in meeting those challenges in the years ahead. Local Government Reform Hon. FW PITT (Mulgrave—ALP) (Minister for Main Roads and Local Government) (10.23 am): Since I was appointed local government minister last month, I have been asked many times about the Queensland government’s position on the local government reform process. Therefore, I want to make it clear to my parliamentary colleagues and the public that the Queensland government is absolutely committed to local government reform. This tough but important decision was not made on a whim—nor will it be changed on a whim. It was made after extensive consideration of the issues affecting the future of our state and in accordance with the recommendations of an independent commission. We must always remember that Queensland remains Australia’s fastest growing state. This growth, while providing substantial economic opportunities, brings with it pressures and challenges that must be addressed. In the coming decades local government will be at the forefront of many of these challenges. Queensland needs a stronger local government system with the capacity and capability to meet these challenges. Stronger councils will have a greater ability to manage population growth, grasp major economic development opportunities and improve regional, urban and infrastructure planning and coordination. Most importantly, the average ratepayer can look forward to a system of local government that has less duplication, less red tape, fewer politicians and a significantly enhanced focus on service delivery and infrastructure provision. I am pleased to advise that local governments affected by boundary changes are getting on with the job of preparing for new council arrangements. All 34 local transition committees have been established and have held their first meetings. Furthermore, as of late last week, the last of the 31 interim chief executive officers was appointed and has started work. Councils are to be congratulated on the professionalism and spirit of cooperation that has been shown to date. The government’s commitment to building a stronger system of local government for all Queenslanders remains steadfast. I look forward to providing further updates to parliament as the transition progresses. 09 Oct 2007 Scrutiny of Legislation Committee 3227

Small Business Hon. RJ WELFORD (Everton—ALP) (Minister for Education and Training and Minister for the Arts) (10.25 am): Small business is a real driver of the Queensland economy. It represents almost 97 per cent of all private sector business in the state and employs more than 610,000 Queenslanders. In March this year, as part of our government’s $1 billion Queensland Skills Plan, I launched the Small Business Solutions initiative to provide Queensland’s small business owners with greater training support to boost their skills and grow their businesses. This is a key initiative of our $1 billion Skills Plan because of the significant contribution the small business sector makes to our economy. Queensland is the only state in Australia where small business owners can access mentoring and receive formal qualifications in business management at the same time through this unique service. In the first seven months of its operation, I am pleased to report to the House, more than 250 Queensland small businesses have now been receiving mentoring and advice through the Small Business Solutions initiative. Business owners who have used the mentoring service have reported a range of highly successful results, with many experiencing immediate improvement to their bottom line. The service has been designed to help small businesses in selling, industrial relations, profit, loss and business growth, marketing and sales, human resource management, computer skills and business planning. It makes use of experts, mentors and successful small business managers to deliver a one-on-one, peer-to-peer business based mentoring service. This is not a service just for ‘struggling’ small businesses but rather it is here to help small to medium enterprises to grow in productivity and increase their profitability. Some businesses have found the initiative so helpful that they have signed up for further mentoring. Of the original clients, 15 per cent have reregistered for additional mentoring. The initiative, which initially focused on Brisbane, has now expanded into Townsville and the Gold Coast and will roll out statewide within the next 12 months. It is not only small businesses that have recognised the success of the Small Business Solutions initiative. The project has also won the 2007 Australian Marketing Institute Queensland division award for marketing excellence in the education category. It will go on to vie for a national award in Sydney on 18 October. I am sure members join me in wishing the Small Business Solutions team all the best in the national awards.

STANDING ORDERS COMMITTEE

Appointment of Hon. PT Lucas Hon. RE SCHWARTEN (Rockhampton—ALP) (Leader of the House) (10.28 am), by leave, without notice: I move— That the Deputy Premier, the Hon. Paul Lucas, be appointed as a member of the Standing Orders Committee to fill the vacancy caused by the resignation of the former Premier, the Hon. Peter Beattie. Motion agreed to.

PREMIER OF QUEENSLAND Hon. RE SCHWARTEN (Rockhampton—ALP) (Leader of the House) (10.28 am): by leave, without notice: I move— That this House acknowledges the significance of this historic occasion where, for the first time since the commencement of the Queensland parliament on 22 May 1860, there is a female Premier of Queensland. Mr SEENEY (Callide—NPA) (Leader of the Opposition) (10.28 am): I second the motion and congratulate the member for South Brisbane on attaining that milestone. Motion agreed to. Mr SPEAKER: On behalf of the House and in my capacity as the Speaker, I congratulate the Premier with regard to that high honour.

SCRUTINY OF LEGISLATION COMMITTEE

Report Mrs SULLIVAN (Pumicestone—ALP) (10.29 am): I table the Scrutiny of Legislation Committee’s Alert Digest No. 10 of 2007. Tabled paper: Scrutiny of Legislation Committee Alert Digest No. 10 of 2007. Mr SPEAKER: Before I call question time I have a great deal of pleasure in welcoming to the public gallery today Mr Daryl Reynolds and Mrs Dianne Korare, who are my brother and sister. I would like to welcome them both to the gallery today. 3228 Questions Without Notice 09 Oct 2007

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

Ministerial Standards Mr SEENEY (10.30 am): My first question is to the Premier. I refer to her comments shortly after she was sworn in when she said that she would be ‘laying down the law in terms of ministerial standards’. I note in recent times that the Premier’s government has seen former health minister Gordon Nuttall facing charges for corruptly receiving money, former tourism minister Merri Rose jailed for blackmail, parliamentary secretary Karen Struthers charged with drink driving, former Minister for Emergency Services Pat Purcell still before the court and transport minister and Deputy Premier Paul Lucas in trouble over traffic offences. What specifically has the Premier done to ensure that this shameful record of ministerial standards is not continued, or is she still relying on the eyeballing techniques of her predecessor? Ms BLIGH: I thank the honourable member for the question. I am happy to assure him, the other members of the House and the public in general that I take the responsibilities of leadership very seriously. I understand that from time to time part of those responsibilities will involve being involved in the discipline of members, and I will not shy away one step from those responsibilities. I can also assure the member that at my first cabinet meeting I had a very serious discussion with my cabinet ministers. I outlined to them clearly my expectations of them and indicated that I would not be supporting in any way activities that would not meet normal and reasonable community standards. I believe that I am lucky to have a cabinet of people who are hardworking, who are talented, who are diligent, who are, from my perspective, people of integrity and who are honest and decent. I can also assure the member that my eyeballs are as fierce as those of the former Premier and that my ministers— Mr Schwarten: I reckon they’re worse. Ms BLIGH: I take that interjection. The member for Rockhampton says they are worse. My ministers are under no illusions about the standards that I set and I have every confidence in them. I will deal with one of the matters that have arisen since I took up the responsibilities of Premier and that is the allegation that the member opposite made in relation to the Deputy Premier. The member for Lytton is not the first Deputy Premier to be involved in a speeding matter. There are members of this House who will recall that a former Deputy Premier, the former Liberal Deputy Premier in the Borbidge government, was involved in a speeding issue. On that occasion the then Deputy Premier was caught speeding at close to 130 kilometres an hour in a 100 kilometres an hour zone. As I understand it, her personal police security officer had a quiet chat with the police officer who was involved and no fine was issued and no fine was paid. Of course, this reasonably raised concerns in the community. The former police commissioner, Noel Newnham, even went so far as to prompt the then Treasurer to pay the fine, stating that it would ease the minds of everyone. But she did not. What did my deputy do? When my deputy found that there was a speeding event that might have involved him, he wrote a letter to the Queensland Police Service and asked to be fined. There has been this ludicrous nonsense from those opposite suggesting that the Deputy Premier has been involved in some sort of cover-up. I can only issue the strongest advice to people that if they are seeking to ever cover up a matter, writing to the Queensland Police Service about it is a very foolhardy way to go about it. That was the action of an honest and decent man—someone who went out of his way to do the right thing. Water Assets Mr SEENEY: My second question is also to the Premier. I refer to the value of the water assets of south-east Queensland councils which have been independently assessed now at $6 billion—over four times what the Premier’s government claimed when it announced that it would seize the water assets from the councils. At the time the Premier said that water users could expect an increase in water charges of about 150 per cent. Now that the cost of compensation for these assets will be over four times what she estimated, will the water charges suffered by people in south-east Queensland also be four times more than what the Premier estimated? Ms BLIGH: I thank the Leader of the Opposition for the question. The structural changes to water to which the member alludes are part of a very significant reform to the supply, storage and distribution of water in the south-east corner of the state. Our government is very proud of this reform. It is an important part of getting water supply and water security right and we do not resile from it. Understandably, when we move to transfer responsibility for an activity that has been held previously by another level of government—in this case local government—there will be some argy- bargy about it. The latest reports that we have seen in the last couple of days in relation to a report valuing the assets at $6 billion are merely the latest in a long line of assertions from the council of mayors. 09 Oct 2007 Questions Without Notice 3229

Notably, the Lord Mayor of Brisbane has changed his tune on this on, I think, no less than three or four occasions. In March this year he asserted that it would require a $10 billion commitment. In May he revised that to what he believed would be a $3 billion commitment. This week, he has indicated it is now a $6 billion commitment. We are in the process of sitting down around the table with Treasury officers and the financial officers of each of the relevant councils and negotiating the value of their assets. It is hardly surprising, then, in the middle of those negotiations that we would see this sort of ambit claim launch itself into the arena. Let me make a couple of things clear. Firstly, we are not transferring responsibility for all of the assets owned by councils, only some of them. Secondly, we are not compensating for things we have already paid for. Much of the value of these assets was already funded by the state government when they were actually built. I made it clear from day one that we would not be paying twice for the equity in those assets. Thirdly, we made a commitment at the time—and I have an agreement from the Lord Mayor of Brisbane on this—that the formula we would apply was a formula based on forecast lost revenue rather than the total value of the asset. So that is the basis upon which we will go forward. As I said, I am not at all surprised that we would see this from the councils. But I remind the councils, particularly those of a conservative persuasion, that they will be treated much better by this government than they were treated by the Bjelke-Petersen government, which seized their electricity assets without a single dollar. Opposition members interjected. Ms BLIGH: They do not like being reminded of the truth, do they. I gave a commitment that they would get fair compensation and we will live up to that commitment. This reform is a critical part of getting water right and we will not step away from it. We will guarantee in that process that ratepayers will not be assuming water costs beyond what is reasonable. Inner-City Suburbs, Services and Infrastructure Ms JONES: My question is to the Premier. Could the Premier outline the work underway by the Queensland government to ensure that people living in the inner-city suburbs continue to have the services and infrastructure that they deserve? Ms BLIGH: I thank the honourable member for the question and I congratulate her on taking up her position as the Deputy Whip. It is great to have her on the team. The member for Ashgrove, like other members, will know that the inner-city parts of our city are experiencing a lot of pressure as more and more young families and people are moving to higher-density living and moving into those areas and, quite rightly, expect to see services. Indeed, people from the outer suburbs and other parts of the state want a capital city and an inner-city area that has significant investment in it. Our government has indeed invested heavily in the inner-city suburbs in projects such as the Inner City Bypass, the refurbishment of the Fortitude Valley Police Station, the Kelvin Grove Urban Village—an outstanding example of planning—and the redevelopment of the Royal Brisbane and Royal Women’s Hospital. I am determined to ensure that our city continues to be well serviced. Of course, in order to do that we will need to make sure that the city of Brisbane has a good voice in our government. Later this week—on Saturday, 13 October—we will see a by-election for the vacancy caused by the resignation of the former Premier, Peter Beattie. This electorate is one that has been served very well by Peter Beattie for 18 years, but I am pleased that the Australian Labor Party has chosen Grace Grace to contest this seat. Grace is a local. She was born in the electorate. She has lived there all her life. In fact, in my view Grace fits perfectly with what the Leader of the Liberal Party indicated would be needed for the seat when he said that the seat of Brisbane Central is crying out for a strong local voice. The Labor Party is determined to put a strong local candidate in the field. Of course, this stands in strong contrast to the efforts of both the Liberal Party and the National Party in this regard. Grace is a very energetic and enthusiastic candidate. The same cannot be said of members of the Liberal Party. The Liberal Party simply could not muster the energy to put a candidate in the field. The member for Moggill wanted to run a candidate. He had gone to Germany, from where he issued instructions that a candidate should be put in the field. Party headquarters ignored him. When ABC Radio asked whether, as the state leader of the party, he should have been listened to he stated, ‘I would love it if that was the case.’ Mr Lucas: Wouldn’t that be good? Ms BLIGH: Wouldn’t that be a good thing! He would love it if that was the case. We were treated to the 24-hour farce of the National Party trying to stump up a candidate and then telling people that they could not do it in such a short period. Of course, they had one all along but they never wanted to get into the field when the Liberal Party had failed to do so. On the other side we have an opposition that must be one of the only oppositions in the country to be simply opposed to itself. The one most opposed to it is itself. 3230 Questions Without Notice 09 Oct 2007

Mr SPEAKER: Before calling the member for Moggill, I welcome to the public gallery teachers and students from the Morayfield East State School in the electorate of Kallangur, represented in this place by the honourable Ken Hayward.

Goods and Services Tax Dr FLEGG: My question without notice is to the Treasurer. On 18 March 2004, the Treasurer told this House that the GST was the illegitimate child of the Commonwealth. He said— Here is my challenge to the Commonwealth: please take back the money from the GST—every last cent, 100%. Does the Treasurer still repudiate tax reform and consider the GST as illegitimate? Is his idea of reforming federal-state finances that the Commonwealth should take back $8 billion in GST revenue and instead slug Queenslanders with punitive income tax rates? Mr FRASER: I thank the Leader of the Liberal Party for the question. Like most members of the parliament, I took a bit of time in thinking about what I might say the first time I got to my feet in this place. Like most other members of the House, I remain quite proud of what I said the first time I was on my feet in this House. I recommend that the Leader of the Liberal Party not just read an excerpt from that speech but read it from start to finish. The point that I was making remains as valid now as it did then. It is this: any concept that we in Australia have about the benefit of a Federation that is properly financed to accord with the responsibilities and liabilities that different levels of government have is a nonsense. For instance, this issue has been recently advanced, I think quite cogently, by the Business Council of Australia. Secondly, there will forever be a discussion in the Australian community and more broadly about adjustments to tax rates at the margins, which never gets to the fact that if the Australian Federation was a listed company one would not go near it. Why? Because its revenue centres and cost centres are completely out of alignment. That does not make for the efficient delivery of government services. Over the past few years in this country, this is what has happened with federal financial relations: the Commonwealth says that it has the GST money, so it seeks to compromise the legitimate pursuit of any mandate of any state government by directing that state government to pursue a particular policy objective, which might actually be completely opposed to an election mandate that it had achieved. In this country we need a rational debate—not one conducted with hyperbole such as the member for Moggill seeks, but a serious debate about the way we actually confront how the Federation of Australia is financed. Mr Hobbs interjected. Mr Seeney interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! I ask the members on my left to give the Treasurer a fair go. They have asked the question and should let the Treasurer answer it. Opposition members interjected. Mr SPEAKER: I ask members on my left to respect the Treasurer, who is on his feet. Mr FRASER: Ultimately, it actually requires a modicum of insight and intellect if we are going to confront the single biggest public policy issue in Australia, which is the fact that our Federation is not financed properly. While that is the case and while there exists a disparity between the revenues and the expenses, there will forever be the sort of duckshoving and blame shifting that goes on. I have great optimism about the result of the federal election, one of the key reasons being that, for the first time, we might have the opportunity to conduct a sensible debate about taxation reform that takes account of the broader issues and no longer seeks to fiddle at the margins.

Daylight Saving Mr HOOLIHAN: My question without notice is also to the Premier. In asking this question, I pass on the congratulations of the secretary of the Caves Progress Association and other people who have contacted me to offer their support for the Premier’s reiteration of the government’s clear and unequivocal position on daylight saving. Could the Premier outline the overall reaction across Queensland to this important decision? Ms BLIGH: Last week I outlined that cabinet had considered the issue of daylight saving and that, after a great deal of deliberation, we had resolved that the current status quo would remain—that is, we will remain on Eastern Standard Time and we will not be conducting a referendum or trialling any zonal system. I can advise the House that overwhelming support for that position has been conveyed to the Premier’s office and from a number of local members. 09 Oct 2007 Questions Without Notice 3231

As a government we had to make a decision. Given that there was a referendum on this issue in 1992 that resolved it in a very definitive way, we had to make a decision about whether there was any basis on which to believe another referendum would succeed. In our view, there was very little basis for that. To the extent that it was supported, that support was geographically isolated in one part of the state. It was not something that all Queenslanders wanted to support. Similarly, we were of the view— and the research that I published has indicated this—there was no support for two zones. I think Queenslanders know that my government and the Labor Party will not be supporting any change to the status quo on daylight saving. I have made that clear. I assure the House that our position on that will not be changing. I will not be revisiting that matter while I am Premier. However, the opposition is not quite as clear in its views. On day one Mr Seeney, the Leader of the Opposition, welcomed the decision of the government. He sent a letter to a number of regional newspapers—and many members will have seen it—in which he starts, ‘I welcome the Premier’s decision not to introduce daylight saving.’ I thank him for his support but, like a lot of positions the opposition adopts, that support was very short lived. As soon as the Leader of the Opposition got out of the zone up there and came to the zone down here, he was very quick to back the Liberal Prime Minister on the issue of trialling some sort of zonal system involving two time zones. It is not surprising that he would support a zonal system or regard it as inevitable, because a zonal system would, of course, formalise his own behaviour where he says one thing in one zone—that is, the bush—and then says another thing in a different zone—that is, the city. Of course the Leader of the Liberal Party will not commit to any position, but he does want a referendum or a trial. We know that the one referendum he does not want is a referendum on himself in the seat of Brisbane Central. The member for Cunningham, Mr Copeland, said, ‘I believe to have two time zones would be the worst option available.’ The member for Southern Downs, TV’s favourite backbencher, last year said that a coalition government would not introduce daylight saving in Queensland. If the people of Queensland can figure out what it is that the coalition believes on daylight saving, they are doing a much better job than I am. I wish them luck. From what we know about the zonal system and those who support it, it is not surprising that we hear it from that side of politics because they are the great dividers. They are divided within themselves, divided between themselves and now they want to divide the state.

Power Price Increases Miss SIMPSON: My question is to the Premier. Her government is blaming the power price hikes on the drought, forcing domestic consumers to cop an 11 per cent price hike and businesses to cop rises of up to 400 per cent. However, in New South Wales, which is facing the same drought, prices have risen by only half or less than the increases in Queensland. This is because of her government’s failure to build timely water infrastructure, not the drought. I ask: what guarantee will the Premier give Queenslanders that their electricity prices will fall when the claimed drought-proofing water grid is in place? Ms BLIGH: I thank the member for the question. As is often the case with questions from that quarter it is based on a false premise. The electricity generators in Sydney are not facing the water shortages that those in the south-east corner of Queensland are facing. Here in the south-east we have two major electricity generators, the Tarong and Swanbank power stations, and they are facing the worst supply of water in the worst drought that this part of the state has ever seen. Mr Mickel: Why did you build Tarong there in the first place? Ms BLIGH: We will not even go into the question of why Tarong was built where it was in the first place. Let me say that it is a credit to generators, and I pay tribute to them for the work that they have done to reduce their supply and their call on the supplies of Wivenhoe. We will work with the generators over the next 12 months in the lead-up to the full supply of the recycled pipeline on how they will manage their take from the Wivenhoe system. I think most people understand that it takes a lot of water to generate electricity. When there is a time of serious drought the costs of generating that electricity will inevitably rise. There has been, and it is some several months ago now, some price rises in electricity. I expect as Premier—and I know that the Treasurer and the other shareholding minister, the minister for energy, will be expecting—to see the generators come in with much lower operating costs when we see the water grid delivering a secure supply of water and when we see the drought come to an end, which I hope is very soon. We are hoping for that to happen, but we are not planning for it or expecting it. We are planning for the worst and hoping for the best. As we see more water security and more water supply come into the system, do I expect the cost of generating electricity to drop? Of course I do. I certainly expect to see that reflected in pricing to customers. We put in place pricing arrangements to be considered by the Queensland Competition Authority and these are the very sorts of input costs that it will take into account in its price determination. 3232 Questions Without Notice 09 Oct 2007

I can also advise members that we are seeing a new generation of generators, if you like, taking on new technology. The new Kogan Creek Power Station will be using new technology that will see it use significantly less water in the generation of electricity than certainly any other generator in Queensland. It will be at the cutting edge of this technology and long-term droughts will have a very little effect on the generation and cost of supply of that electricity. Similarly, we are seeing new players come into the field—Origin Energy and a number of others— seeking to undertake significant investment in greenfield sites in gas-fired power. I certainly believe that the long-term future of power supply not only is secure but also will be competitive. I expect to see that reflected in pricing and I am very sure that the QCA will take all of that into account in its deliberations.

Water Restrictions Mr FENLON: My question is to the Deputy Premier and Minister for Infrastructure and Planning. Could the minister inform the House of the progress residential users have made towards reducing their water use and what effect proposed level 6 water restrictions would have on business and residential users? Mr LUCAS: I thank the honourable member for the question. As we all know, south-east Queensland residents are leading the battle against the worst drought on record. Last week, residential use dropped to 130 litres per person per day. That is below the Queensland Water Commission’s target. It is a job well done by residential users. We offer them a big thanks. We are pleased to note that in releasing draft level 6 water restrictions the Water Commission has provided a reprieve from the previously considered total outdoor watering ban. I do note, however, the Queensland Water Commission’s advice that this position will be reviewed if performance against Target 140 does not continue. We had a stretch of quite hot weather the other day and the water usage actually decreased. In this last week it has been good news again for the people of south-east Queensland. This is not only an incentive for residents to continue to achieve water savings as we approach summer months but also a lifeline for the gardening and nursery industries which this government acknowledges have been under pressure as a result of the drought. It is up to each and every one of us in the south east to play a part in conserving our most precious resource and that includes business. Residents get a big tick for the hard work and commitment they have shown to reducing their water usage. The Water Commission has said household users have by and large stepped up to the plate. So have many businesses, but some are letting the side down. Businesses are key to level 6 and fines will be enforced for those who do not meet targets. There are a large number of companies that have reduced water consumption, like Wesley Linen Service, which has reduced its water consumption by up to 60 per cent, and Fosters at Yatala, which has doubled production but with a modest 10 to 15 per cent increase in water use. These are world-class companies. If they can do it, so can the rest of the large water users in the business community. It is not fair that residents are achieving huge savings—almost a 50 per cent reduction in overall water use since water restrictions commenced—while some in the business sector have only made half-hearted attempts to reduce water consumption. Under draft level 6 water restrictions businesses must meet targets of 25 per cent savings or best practice by November 2008, install meters on equipment and processes using 15 per cent of their total water and allow inspections by council officers who can impose on-the-spot fines ranging from $750 to $3,750. Those monies will accrue to the council. Businesses will face fines of up to $124,875 for failing to comply with the Water Efficiency Management Plan process. While these are tough new penalties, the non-residential sector has been required to implement WEMPs since level 4 water restrictions were announced in November 2006. People can comment on the proposed level 6 water restrictions until 15 October—next Monday. One of the great virtues of water restrictions is that it is a no-regrets policy. The fact that we are focusing more and more on water efficiency in industrial and residential use in this very dry country is good news for all of us. What it means is that when it rains again and we get more water in our dams we will be more efficient users of this precious resource. For too long we have taken it for granted. This is not only about responding to the drought at the moment but also responding to best practice. Any resource and input that we use is precious. The more we use that precious water effectively the more that we can continue to enjoy a good lifestyle into the future.

Local Transition Committees Mr McARDLE: My question is to the Premier. The Courier-Mail reported on 18 September that an Australian Services Union spokesman claimed that it did not matter whether the union members sitting on local government transition committees were local and ‘We’ll put on whoever we want to put on, frankly’. Does the Premier support the union statement that their members are not on the committees to offer support for the whole of the local community and, secondly, does she support the union that their members do not require any local knowledge to sit on a transition committee? 09 Oct 2007 Questions Without Notice 3233

Ms BLIGH: I thank the member for the question and I am glad to have an opportunity to put on record my thanks and gratitude to all of those people who are working on our local transition committees that, from the advice I am receiving, are up and running. There are many people out there doing their best to actually make sure that they grab the opportunity that is there and I congratulate them. This is a great service to their community and I think that they are doing a good job. No doubt there will be challenges and problems along the way, but with a great sense of purpose and goodwill I understand that they are getting on with the job and I thank them for it. Specifically in relation to the member’s question, this matter has been widely canvassed in the parliament before and I can only add to that by saying that the overwhelming task for the committees is to bring together disparate and separate workforces, which in many cases are actually under different industrial conditions and salary rates and in some cases may come from two, three, four or five different councils, into one new single organisation. There will be many parts to that process, but a very significant part of it is the industrial translation of workers in those organisations. This government makes absolutely no apology for putting the industrial security of those workers and their families as a priority for these transition committees. I understand that there are people out there who want to know, quite reasonably, where will they be employed, what they will be doing and what their pay rates and entitlements will be. We need those questions settled in their interests as quickly as possible. A significant role of unions on that committee is to ensure that that transition process is done fairly, that it is done well, and that it is done in accordance with the appropriate industrial instruments and legislation. The last thing we want is people believing that they are doing one thing and finding that there is no industrial instrument or legislation to underpin that. I am certainly being advised that the unions and the representatives of unions who are working on those committees are doing a good job. There has been some suggestion that having the same representative on more than one committee is somehow untoward. I want people treated the same whether they currently work in Rosewood, Toowoomba or Jondaryan. I want to make sure that there is consistency of entitlements. I do not think that there is any problem. What I do notice, of course, is that the one place those opposite did not want to have a local voice, the one place that the member for Caloundra’s party decided that there was no need for a community representative—no need for any local voice—was the seat of Brisbane Central. Those opposite had an opportunity to put their case on this and any other issue to the people—to take its points of view to the electorate—and it walked away from that opportunity. The Liberal Party cannot, in my view, hold its head up here with any credibility on any issue. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Before calling the member for Kallangur, I welcome to the gallery today teachers and students from the Kenmore State School in the electorate of Moggill, which is represented in this place by Dr Bruce Flegg. Gambling Revenue Mr HAYWARD: My question without notice is directed to the Treasurer. There has been recent community debate about the amount of revenue the state government receives from gambling. Can the Treasurer tell the House how much tax the government collects from poker machines and how it is used? Mr FRASER: I thank the member for Kallangur for the question, and I would also like to add to some remarks that have been made in the community recently about the way in which gambling revenue is received by the government and to what it is applied. It is a fact that last year the Queensland government received just over $500 million—$517 million—in gaming machine revenue. That money is provided to build the schools and hospitals that are required to meet the growth needs of the state. Moreover, components of those funds received from gaming activities are also applied to ensure that we have a very robust system of support for problem gambling, and that we encourage responsible gambling through both the provision of counselling services and the provision of marketing campaigns so that we can connect those people who move beyond gaming being a legitimate recreational pursuit to where it can be a problem. Part of our commitment to ensuring that there is always high integrity and responsibility in the conduct of gaming is that we have a range of efforts through the Queensland Office of Gaming Regulation to ensure the highest integrity in the conduct of gaming. Later this morning I will be joining with the Fundraising Institute of Australia to lunch a new tool kit for charity groups and community groups which conduct much of their funding through the provision of art unions to ensure that the highest level of integrity is retained within that system. It is important to remember also in this context that $35 million is provided each year through the Gambling Community Benefit Fund. That is a fund that I know is well known to every single member of this parliament. It is a fund which recently had a significant level of renewal on its committee. The new 3234 Questions Without Notice 09 Oct 2007 chair of the committee, Mary Philip, is a former board member. I know that there are a number of issues about the latest round from the Gambling Community Benefit Fund, and in that regard I take the opportunity to inform members of the House that the committee will be meeting within the week and thereafter the allocations will shortly be made. This will not impact on future allocations of the fund. The reason for the slight delay relates to the change in the composition of that committee, but we will see the committee in operation and providing that level of funding support into the community. On that matter, I might also take the opportunity to advise members of the House that within the provisions of the way in which that fund operates I am taking the opportunity to provide a direction to the fund that it give priority to applications in the next round from community groups that have been affected by the equine influenza crisis. So that will be pony clubs and the like which have been affected by the impact of equine influenza. I think that is an appropriate response to meet the needs of those community groups which have been impacted in various ways by the outbreak of equine influenza. In the end, that fund has long provided a great benefit to the Queensland community. It will continue to do just that, both now and into the future. Moreover, it will continue to be the case that the funding that is gained through that revenue stream is applied to full public benefit.

Overseas Trained Nurses Ms LEE LONG: My question is directed to the Minister for Health. My question refers to Queensland Health’s overseas recruiting drives, particularly in the United Kingdom and especially for nurses for the Cairns Base Hospital. Is it true that nurses and their families are brought out at great expense to the Queensland taxpayer? Is it also true that many of these nurses are not even starting work before returning to the UK because they do not like it here? Mr ROBERTSON: I thank the member for the question. I am unaware that that may be the case. Mr Lucas interjected. Mr ROBERTSON: Some of us do actually stay and go on to make a great contribution to the welfare of this state. Whilst we now offer a very attractive package to employ overseas trained doctors, nurses and allied health professionals, it is a matter of individual choice, having arrived in Australia, whether they do in fact stay. I am unaware of any numbers or proportion of nurses who have come out who do return to the UK without commencing work, but I will make some inquiries, particularly in Cairns, which has been very successful in recruiting nurses from the UK over the last year or so. Of course, the member for Tablelands would not have needed to ask this question had the federal government not taken its eye off the ball and created the chronic shortage of health professionals in this country. We have seen a chronic shortage of doctors in Australia, and we need only look at interstate newspapers on a daily basis to see the impact that the shortage of doctors is having in maintaining health services in rural Australia—just as we have pressures here in Queensland. But I have to say that the big issue very quickly coming our way within the next number of years will be a chronic shortage of nurses that will make the shortage of doctors look positively easy to address. What we will see not just here in Australia but throughout most of the Western World will be a cohort of nurses who will be retiring at around about the same time. Unless Australia and other countries embrace that issue and start increasing the throughput of nurses through our educational institutions now, then within the next decade Australia will suffer a chronic shortage of nurses. These issues should be debated quite openly in the context of the current federal election campaign. Yet what do we see from the government in terms of its response to the issues affecting health care in this country today? Bring back hospital boards. That is its No. 1 response. If anyone can demonstrate to me how bringing back hospital boards will employ one extra doctor, one extra nurse or one extra allied health professional, then I will embrace it myself. The simple fact is that they do nothing. It is a dewy-eyed, back-to-the-future approach that will deliver nothing in terms of relieving the pressures on our public and private health systems in Australia today.

Elective Surgery Mrs SULLIVAN: My question is also directed to the Minister for Health. The minister would be aware that managing non-urgent elective surgery waiting lists is a huge challenge in every state. I ask the minister: are there any innovative initiatives underway in Queensland to reduce waiting times for treatment? Mr ROBERTSON: I thank the member for the question. In contrast to what I just said in answer to the previous question, the Bligh government is taking steps to improve health services in this state and a very Smart State government initiative to reduce orthopaedic waiting lists is taking off across Queensland. Our orthopaedic physiotherapy screening clinics have proved so successful in six public hospitals that they are being expanded to another 10 throughout Queensland. 09 Oct 2007 Questions Without Notice 3235

I have recently approved $4.3 million to expand the program to Toowoomba, Cairns, Redcliffe, the Sunshine Coast, Bundaberg, Rockhampton, Mackay, Logan and the Mater adult’s and children’s hospitals. Clinics will continue at the PA, Royal Brisbane and Women’s, QEII, Southport, Ipswich and Townsville hospitals. These clinics have been a great success in the past three years by reducing waiting lists and times for people referred to an orthopaedic specialist for assessment. More than 1,500 patients have been effectively managed through these clinics and through their physio treatment. Many of them have not needed to see a specialist about their condition. I expect at least 5,000 more Queenslanders to get faster treatment over the next three years as this program is rolled out. For example, in the 18 months to February this year, the RBWH reduced its waiting list for category 3 orthopaedic outpatients from nearly 1,700 to 740, and reduced average waiting times by more than 200 days. At the PA in the 12 months to February, waiting times for category 3 orthopaedic spinal referrals dropped from nearly two years to a little over nine months. Other hospitals in the trial have reported similar results. I expect these results to be replicated many times over as the service starts to expand from November this year. This service mostly benefits patients with degenerative joint disease who do not require urgent surgery. As few as one out of every four patients referred to an orthopaedic specialist proceed to surgery, and for spinal cases only one in 10. It therefore makes good sense for a health professional such as a physio to engage in non-operative treatment of their condition in clinically appropriate circumstances while they are waiting to see a specialist. Many non-urgent patients who could expect a wait of at least 18 months to see a specialist might only need to wait less than three months for physio treatment. This is a smarter, quicker, more efficient way of delivering health care by better utilising our allied health workforce with real benefits for patients. Orthopaedic surgeons benefit because a greater percentage of patients referred to them will have legitimate surgical needs and those not needing surgery will be dealt with by other highly skilled professionals at these clinics. This is a perfect example of our $10 billion Health Action Plan reforming our system to deliver smarter, better services for Queenslanders. Queensland Injectors Health Network Mrs STUCKEY: My question without notice is to the Premier. I refer to a publicly funded program from the Queensland Injectors Health Network and I table their flyer about that program. Tabled paper: Copy of a Queensland Injectors Health Network flyer This program is exclusively for injectors of illicit drugs and the flyer is headed ‘Wanna make some cash?’, and offers to pay $110 in cash to drug addicts to ‘learn a bit, share a bit and make a bit in the Mixup project’. Does the Premier support Queensland taxpayers’ money being doled out as cash to drug addicts, and what does she think the cash will be spent on? Ms BLIGH: I thank the member for the question. These are very tough issues. I am not familiar with the work that this network is doing, but I am familiar with the fact that one of the ways that Australia and Queensland has dealt with the issue of HIV-AIDS is to be very open, honest and frank about the fact that some people live lives where they are addicted to drugs that involve injection. That does not mean that I condone it. It does not mean that we should not seek in every way possible to stop this behaviour. But it does mean that we need to speak to people who are injecting in very open ways. This network is a statewide non-government organisation which receives both state and federal funding, so it is not just our government that funds this network. This network is funded by the federal government as well. It provides education, counselling, detoxification and needle and syringe program services to injecting drug users. Dr Flegg: You don’t give cash to drug addicts. Mr SPEAKER: Member for Moggill, you are very repetitive. Cease your interjections. Ms BLIGH: This organisation operates the second largest needle and syringe program in the state with the aim of preventing the spread of blood-borne viral infections among people who inject drugs. I would have thought we would all condone that sort of activity. Obviously Queensland Health, as one of the funders, has expectations of all of the organisations that it funds to do their work appropriately. I am very happy to refer this matter to the Minister for Health for further information about this particular promotion. I do encourage people to be very mindful of the fact that other countries have not been as open as Australia has been in relation to matters such as drug injection, sexual activity or the need for safe sex practices. Many of those conversations have not been easy for our community to have and there have been plenty of people who have tried to shut those conversations down. I think it is a credit to Australia that, under all sides of politics at different levels of government, we have been open enough to have those discussions and to encourage organisations like this to be talking directly to drug users to encourage them to take steps to minimise the spread of these sorts of diseases. That is an important public health issue. Of course we expect them to do it appropriately. I am happy to advise the House further on this particular program. 3236 Questions Without Notice 09 Oct 2007

Housing Affordability Mr PEARCE: My question is to the Minister for Public Works, Housing and Information and Communication Technology. Is the minister aware of claims by the Liberal candidate for Capricornia that he has the solution to the housing affordability crisis, and how does this claim compare to the Prime Minister’s recent comments on this issue? Mr SCHWARTEN: I thank the honourable member for the question because, like me, he would be acquainted with the ads that the Liberal candidate Scott Kilpatrick is running in Capricornia. The front page of the Rockhampton Morning Bulletin says, ‘Scott Kilpatrick has the solution to the housing affordability crisis’. He also says in his radio ad, ‘Scott Kilpatrick has the solution to the housing affordability crisis. Come and see for yourself’ et cetera. That is at odds with statements that are coming out of the mouths of our Prime Minister and our federal Treasurer. They say there is no crisis. They say there is no such thing as an affordable housing crisis. Yet here we have a candidate of theirs on the ground out there suggesting that he has the solution. What is his solution? I will tell you what his solution is. It is to find between $304,000 and $317,000 and buy a house from him. As far as I can see, that typifies exactly where the support for the Liberal Party and the National Party comes from. They have a one-track mind when it comes to this. They see the problem as being about home ownership. They do not take any cognisance of the fact that the member for Fitzroy is constantly reminded when he goes out to the coalfields that workers out there cannot afford to rent a house. In my own electorate rents have escalated by 73 per cent. That is part of Capricornia. The member for Keppel, Mr Hoolihan, is well acquainted with the problem of escalating rents that are pushing ordinary Australians out of our area—they are having to leave the area—because they simply cannot afford to rent a house. As I say, this is absolutely at odds with what the Prime Minister has to say. When asked the question ‘Is there a housing crisis?’, he says no. Anglicare says there is. The HIA, which is not well known as a hotbed of enthusiasm for the Labor Party, says there is a crisis, but still we have this denial. Scott Kilpatrick in his misleading advertising gives the game away on where the Liberal Party stands in this regard. They are in the business of trying to get people into home ownership at any cost and ignoring the fact that the battlers out there in Queensland are increasingly unable to rent a house, unable to get a roof over their head in any set of circumstances outside of home ownership. The reality is that at this time when we have the federal government out there outsourcing public housing, effectively, as announced just this week, we see more and more evidence of where we will end up should the Howard government be returned. I trust that every single Queenslander who is facing the crisis that is acknowledged by Mr Kilpatrick remembers that on election day, especially in Capricornia, and puts Mr Kilpatrick last on the list—as they should with every other tory in this state and this country. If ever there has been a government blinded to an issue in Australia it is the federal government.

Prep Year, Teacher Aides Mr COPELAND: I refer the Premier to the first media statement she made as Premier elect on 12 September in which she claimed that investing in the early years is critical to Labor’s success, a statement she has repeated in the House this morning. If investing in the early years is so critical, why has her government failed to fund full-time teacher aides for prep classrooms? Will the Premier now make this critical investment in children’s education and safety, or can Queenslanders expect more of the same excuses and inaction? Ms BLIGH: I cannot tell the member for Cunningham how much I thank him for this question. The preparatory year of schooling was removed from the Queensland education system in the early 1950s, and no government of any political persuasion had the guts to put it back until our government was elected in 1998. Thank you very much for reminding the House and for giving me an opportunity to remind the people of Queensland. There was a conservative government for 32 of those 50-odd years. So for the member for Cunningham to stand here and talk about early childhood education is simply implausible. Mr Messenger interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Member for Burnett, your neighbour has asked the question. Let the Premier answer it. Ms BLIGH: This year we see the rollout of a whole new year of schooling—the preparatory year of schooling—into every Queensland Catholic, independent and public primary school right across the state. This was an enormous undertaking. It relied upon the goodwill and hard work of our teachers, our teacher aides, our school administrators and our parents and citizens associations. It required an enormous effort from Q-Build to roll out new classrooms and an enormous investment through the budget process to ensure we had the teaching staff and the teacher aides to staff it. 09 Oct 2007 Questions Without Notice 3237

The teacher aide allocation for our prep classes is among the second highest allocation of teacher aide hours for any preparatory year of schooling in the country. Preparatory classrooms in Victoria—and I have sat in them—do not have any dedicated allocated teacher aide hours. Those children are doing exceptionally well in their literacy and numeracy exams. Any suggestion that anyone on our side of the House is ashamed of our proposals in relation to prep or is in any way taking a step backwards on it is without foundation. I remind the member for Cunningham and those who sit with him that they had an opportunity to develop a policy in this regard and to take that policy to the electorate. They could have done it this Saturday. They could have gone out there this Saturday and letterboxed everybody in the electorate of Brisbane Central. They could have said to every P&C— Mr Copeland interjected. Ms BLIGH: They do not like it. They really do not like it. What those opposite do not want to be reminded of is that they do not have— Ms Spence: Bruce wanted to. Ms BLIGH: I take the interjection. The minister for police is right. Bruce did want to put a candidate in the field but he got rolled by the party. The National Party almost rolled him. He did all of this from overseas. If they want to put a policy forward and take it to the electorate they can, but they do not have the guts to do so. Mr SPEAKER: Can I welcome to the House another group of teachers and students from Kenmore State School in the electorate of Moggill which is represented in this House by Dr Bruce Flegg. Government members interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Those members on my right, can we have some order please. I call the member for Yeerongpilly. Fraser Island, Dingoes Mr FINN: My question without notice is to the Minister for Sustainability, Climate Change and Innovation. At the outset I congratulate the minister on his elevation to that office. Among the many tourist attractions on World Heritage listed Fraser Island is the population of pure-bred dingoes which inhabit the island. Would the minister please outline the government’s approach to managing the dingo population so that they can continue to enjoy life in the wild while remaining a popular tourist experience. Mr Johnson: Give them a triple dose of 1080. Mr SPEAKER: I thank the member for Gregory for that suggestion but let us hear the minister now. Mr McNAMARA: I take the interjection from the member for Gregory. Let us get it on the record that his plan for the management of dingoes on Fraser Island is to shoot them all—use 1080 and poison them all. That is right, kill them all. It is a simple answer, kill them all. I take this opportunity to thank my predecessor in this role, the Hon. Lindy Nelson-Carr. Mr Johnson: I haven’t said anything yet, Mr Speaker. Mr SPEAKER: I am just looking at you, member for Gregory. Mr McNAMARA: Although the new ministerial portfolio has an expanded and different focus from the previous one, I thank the previous minister for the job that she did. Many of the programs on which she focused will be focused on by me as well, particularly pest and weed management in our national parks. Turning to the question from the member for Yeerongpilly, I thank him for his strong interest in this area. As he notes, Fraser Island is a World Heritage listed island with some 350,000 visitors each year coming to the island to experience its unique exhibitions. It is a fantastic place for a family holiday. It is also a place where families, particularly those with young children, need to be careful, need to be cognisant of the risks and need to take the time to note the advice that is provided in relation to dingo safety. Recently the Premier and I announced that we would be arranging for the start of work by the end of this year of building dingo fences around the Eurong and Happy Valley townships on the island. The success of the dingo fence at the Kingfisher Bay Resort is well known and has prompted the Fraser Island advisory committee to endorse the proposal for fences which the Premier and I have announced. I noticed that the announcement drew a shrill response from the shadow minister, the member for Burdekin, which was surprising simply because it is a proposal endorsed by the Fraser Island World Heritage Area Community Advisory Committee. It has hundreds of years of collective experience in relation to the island. I was surprised to see its advice so strongly disregarded by the shadow minister. Indeed, the shadow minister, in her press release, actually said that there was a need to develop a dingo management plan. Welcome to the real world; we have one and she should read it. 3238 Questions Without Notice 09 Oct 2007

Queensland Ambulance Service Mr MALONE: My question without notice is to the Premier. At the estimates committee hearings in July when I asked Minister Roberts to consider conducting a full, independent and transparent inquiry into the Queensland Ambulance Service he replied— I reject your assertion that there are difficulties within the service ... I believe that the service is heading in the right direction. Given that one of the Premier’s first actions was to take over and dump the Emergency Services director-general and order an internal inquiry, why did she stop at the DG and not also replace the minister who has been in total denial of the problems within the QAS since his appointment? Ms BLIGH: If only I had had the option of appointing you as the minister! I am very happy to say that I have full confidence in the Minister for Emergency Services. He is doing an extraordinary job. This is one of those areas of service delivery that will feel the pressure of growth. As we see the population grow, this will be one of those areas—like schools and like health—where we will see pressure from time to time. As I outlined earlier, Queensland spends more per head—that is, more dollars, I think by about 18 per cent, for every man, woman and child in Queensland—than any other state in Australia on our ambulance services. People are entitled to feel that they are getting the service that that sort of investment should reflect. The honourable member is being disingenuous. What he was calling for at the time was some sort of commission of inquiry. I join the minister in saying that I do not believe that is necessary. What we have is a well-funded service that is experiencing the pressure of growth. But that experience is not the same in every station in every part of the state. What we are seeing is a minister who is getting on top of his brief and who has worked very hard with me and the Treasurer to establish the audit that I put in place. I want to make sure before we go down the path of considering further investment that the dollars that we are putting in and that Queenslanders are putting in to our Ambulance Service are going directly to the front line wherever possible. That is what this audit is about. It is about ensuring that all of the funds that can get to frontline service delivery are getting there and that the core business is being reflected in the funding arrangements within the agency. I look forward to the outcomes. As I said earlier, Queensland invests heavily in our ambulance services—unlike a lot of other areas of service delivery where we are still playing catch-up after three decades of neglect under the previous coalition government. Opposition members interjected. Ms BLIGH: They do not like being reminded of their shocking record in this regard. They do not like to be reminded that under the administration of those opposite the Queensland Ambulance Service had to run chook raffles to run the service. Queensland invests $81.50 per capita while nationally we see an investment of $68.80 per capita. There is a substantial investment in ambulance services in this state. I want to make sure it is going to the right place. I am very pleased to advise the House that the Minister for Emergency Services, Neil Roberts, who is a relatively new member to the cabinet, is doing an outstanding job in getting across his brief, meeting with the stakeholders, working with ambulance officers, working with the union, working with senior management to make sure that we are getting the best possible service. I have every confidence that that will be the case in the future. AusLink 2 Ms NOLAN: My question is to the Minister for Main Roads and Local Government. The Prime Minister was in Queensland last week making great fanfare about providing funds under the AusLink 2 funding package for roads. Could the minister please advise the House whether this funding will be adequate or even anywhere near adequate to solve the problems with the AusLink network in Queensland? Mr PITT: I thank the member for the question. The Prime Minister and his deputy spent some time last week criss-crossing the state to announce funding for road upgrades on the AusLink network. Unfortunately, they were not considering the network as a whole. It was done on an electorate by electorate basis, depending on how close the local member is from being tipped out at the next election. The Queensland government welcomes any additional funding from the federal government because these allocations are well and truly long overdue. There has been 11 years of coalition government and we fall further and further behind in getting our fair share of funding from the federal government. I am concerned, however, that some people may feel that it is actually raining money—that these announcements represent some sort of windfall for the state. Nothing could be further from the truth. The money has been needed for 11 years of neglect by the federal government and is only a fraction of what this state requires to make sure that our road network—a federal responsibility—is up to the 09 Oct 2007 Matters of Public Interest 3239 standard that it should be. Members would be aware that the federal government announced an allocation of $22.3 billion for AusLink 2 in this year’s budget. In response, the Queensland government provided the federal government with its AusLink network forward strategy for the years 2009 to 2014, and that request for AusLink 2 was $30 billion. When one looks at the $22 billion that is available from the Commonwealth and the fact that Queensland is asking for $30 billion, some may say that that is an ambit claim. It is not an ambit claim. It is on a needs basis. We need that money to ensure that we have the road system that the people of this state deserve. Furthermore, the funding allocations announced last week come with strings attached, because under AusLink 2 the federal government has imposed conditions such as forcing the states to match funding on proposed AusLink projects at 50 per cent for urban projects and 20 per cent for regional projects. These are roads that are its prime responsibility. It should be funding the whole lot. Time expired. Mr SPEAKER: That completes question time.

MATTERS OF PUBLIC INTEREST

Afghanistan, Death of Trooper David Pearce; Queensland Labor Government Mr SEENEY (Callide—NPA) (Leader of the Opposition) (11.30 am): At the outset I want to place on record my endorsement of the comments made by the Premier this morning in expressing our sympathy towards the family of the young soldier killed in the Middle East. The Premier made those remarks on behalf of all of the parliament. It certainly is a bipartisan message that we would send to the family of that young soldier. We also send good wishes to all of the other young Australians who are serving in that theatre of war. Since taking over the top job, the member for South Brisbane has gone to great lengths to try to distance herself from Peter Beattie and the crises of the state Labor government over the last 10 years, and we saw that happen again this morning in the parliament. Today I want to set the record straight and examine the real record of the Premier and the government that the member for South Brisbane has been an important part of for 10 years. We all know how integral Premier Bligh was to the Beattie government. The now Premier’s fingerprints are stamped all over the kids in care crisis, the asbestos in schools crisis, the health crisis, the ambulance crisis, the water crisis and the electricity crisis. As hard as this Premier might now try to absolve herself of any responsibility for the decisions of the last 10 years, the Premier is kidding herself if she thinks Queenslanders will accept her new-found independence—the attempt to be seen as a cleanskin devoid of all responsibility. This government is tarnished. It was tarnished when Peter Beattie led it and it is tarnished even now. It is the same government presiding over the same problems and the same crises. The Premier was a key component and a key decision maker in the cold and heartless government that sat on its hands for almost a decade and squandered the spoils of unprecedented economic growth delivered by the Howard government. The Queensland Labor government is a government that has built nothing, it is a government that has failed to invest in and reform our health and ambulance services, and it is a government that has failed to properly resource our schools. It is a government that has failed to ensure that the most vulnerable people—kids in care—are protected, and it is a government that has ignored completely the plight of anyone outside the south-east Queensland corner. It was this Premier as Treasurer who plunged Queensland into dangerous and unprecedented levels of debt with no allowance for repaying this $52 billion worth of debt—a millstone around the necks of Queenslanders for generations to come. It was this Premier who as minister was tasked with delivering water infrastructure—infrastructure that was long overdue and which will result in the quadrupling of water prices. It was this Premier who, as a cold and heartless education minister, said that she was comfortable with our children learning in asbestos-riddled buildings. It was this Premier who, as a cold and heartless families minister, failed to adequately resource her department and was forced to establish a commission of inquiry to sort it out. Again, the member for South Brisbane left the department in an enormous mess, with kids still suffering and, in some cases, dying. And the crisis goes on today. The Premier’s track record speaks for itself and she cannot escape it. Every position she has had she has left in a complete and utter mess. Queensland cannot afford any more of a reactive, crisis- ridden state government. We cannot afford a lazy government, and we certainly do not deserve a cold and heartless government. The way the Premier has shown no emotion, no sympathy, no empathy for the hundreds of people set to lose their homes and livelihoods to make way for the ill-conceived and technically flawed Traveston Dam is evidence of a cold and heartless approach that has been 3240 Matters of Public Interest 09 Oct 2007 characteristic of this government. Similarly, the way the Premier and her new offsider the Treasurer, Andrew Fraser, have refused to back down on their cold and heartless approach to tearing Queensland communities apart through forced council amalgamations is evidence enough of their approach to governing this state.

When the member for South Brisbane was first elected, she used her maiden speech to describe what she believed was the role of the incumbent government. The now Premier then said—

The challenge for any incumbent Government is to demonstrate to the electorate a capacity to respond to the responsibilities of Government with innovative and effective measures. Well, as second in charge, the former Deputy Premier has failed miserably in this pledge. What could possibly be different now? I have mentioned in this House previously that a true test of a good government is its ability to provide for future generations. Never forget that future generations of Queenslanders have been significantly disadvantaged after almost a decade of this Labor government, of which the Premier was always a major part. Fixing crises does not just involve throwing money at the problems and putting out the press releases, and that is how this government has consistently managed its problems. Fixing the problems requires managerial capability and it requires leadership, and to date this government has failed every basic test. In addition to the crises that I have already mentioned and that everyone is so aware of, there are also many other emerging problems. There is the crisis in housing affordability; the traffic gridlocks suffocating south-east Queensland; the crumbling public transport system which we have been trying to get the government to focus on for 12 months; the spiralling road toll; the patients who wait forever for operations with their files marked ‘Never to be seen again’; the overstretched Police Service; the drugs rife in prisons; the horse flu that is crippling our racing and recreational horse industries; the problem of sex offenders being released into our communities to walk the streets; the asbestos situation that has not been resolved in teacher accommodation; the coal infrastructure bottlenecks; and of course the local government amalgamations. The list is long and it is varied and it goes on and on. But I believe the first test for the Premier is to stop the pain that local communities are feeling because of the government’s forced amalgamations agenda. The Premier’s fly in, fly out visits to selective communities in regional Queensland—and I note that she chose those that were not affected by the devastation of forced council amalgamations—demonstrates the cold and heartless approach of her government. Not one community that has been directly affected by this process has been visited as part of that blatantly shallow approach. It is in stark contrast to my coalition colleagues and I who have travelled the length and breadth of the state listening to people’s concerns. From Beaudesert to the Torres Strait, communities are concerned about their futures, and the minister and the Premier have avoided them. The Queensland coalition has a plan to allow communities to directly manage their futures, and we will provide people with a local choice and a local voice. In the past we have seen plenty of backflips from Peter Beattie, and I think it is now time to see the first backflip from the new Premier. We will welcome and applaud this backdown. But the biggest test of the Premier’s leadership will be to act on her commitment to lay down the law on ministerial standards and to end the reign of the secret state. The coalition wants to see the Premier stop talking tough and start taking action. How can Queenslanders have any faith in a government with such low standards of ethics and accountability? The Labor government in Queensland has been marred for years by sleazy deals and an enormously high rate of criminal investigations into ministers, former ministers, parliamentary secretaries and members. If the Premier is serious about accountability, she needs to take action—not just continue to preach rhetoric. Let us see ministers and parliamentary secretaries sacked when they break the law. Let us see real reform of freedom of information. Let us see ministers actually answer questions here in the parliament. Let us see some real debate in this place, not the guillotining of bills and the gagging of debates. Let us see a return to an impartial and independent Public Service, not a Public Service full of compliant Labor mates and union hacks. Today I have discussed the past performance of this Premier and the cold and heartless government that she leads. In doing so I have highlighted the crucial roles that the Premier played throughout the Beattie years and how her attempts to distance herself from her predecessor will not wash with Queenslanders. I have also outlined a number of key areas that require the Premier’s urgent attention and the many urgent tasks ahead for the Labor government. I believe politics should not be a cult and it should not be about celebrities; it is about delivering outcomes, it is about making a difference to peoples’ lives, it is about doing the job. Queensland cannot afford a continuation of this reactive, crisis-ridden state government. The Premier needs to live up to the commitments that she made in her maiden speech. The Queensland coalition will be relentless in keeping her and her government accountable. 09 Oct 2007 Matters of Public Interest 3241

Blueprint for the Bush

Ms JARRATT (Whitsunday—ALP) (11.40 am): I grew up in the bush and I maintain strong family ties with rural Queensland. So I understand why sometimes country people say that they feel like they are the invisible citizens of the state. It is not that they feel inferior; it is just that, as the majority of the population lives in a small corner of the state, it sometimes seems as though the government’s attention is disproportionately fixated on that area at the expense of our vast interior. This perception was given a voice at a community cabinet held at Charleville in 2005 and to his eternal credit Premier Beattie announced a proposal to develop a plan—a blueprint—that would entrench and guide the growth and development of rural and remote Queensland over the next 10 years. The Blueprint for the Bush was consequently launched with a pledge that the government would work with AgForce to make a genuine impact on the issues of livability, sustainability and prosperity in regional Queensland. From the beginning, the strength of the B4B has been the partnerships upon which it is based. Minister Pitt was charged with nurturing the plan in its infancy and setting out a strategic direction for a 10-year plan that would deliver real and meaningful outcomes for regional Queensland. I commend the minister for the genuine and sincere manner in which he has engaged with regional Queensland and for his enormous empathy with those thousands of Queenslanders who do not live on the coast. It is significant that the B4B plan was not dreamt up in an office on George Street; it was forged out of the contributions of hundreds of people who actually live in the bush and whose lives are affected by the very issues they nominated to be addressed. The resultant blueprint, which was launched in 2006, contained a range of actions and initiatives that aim to deliver on the guiding vision of building a strong rural Queensland of sustainable, liveable and prosperous communities. So after 12 months of implementation the question is: has B4B delivered on its promise? That was a question at the heart of a B4B ministerial community forum that was held at Mareeba last week. The forum was attended by Minister Pitt and AgForce general president, Peter Kenny, as well as representatives from each of the regionally based ministerial regional communities forums and B4B associate organisations. As a regional Queensland councillor, I was pleased to join several of my colleagues for this important event. The forum was also addressed by ministers Wallace and Mulherin, who each presented a report on the delivery of their agency’s B4B initiatives. One of the highlights of the two-day forum was the tabling of the very first B4B annual report, which I believe demonstrates that the bush is finally receiving the kind of focused attention that it needs to achieve the outcomes of livability, sustainability and prosperity. Sure, there is room for improvement, but it was always intended that B4B would be evolutionary rather than revolutionary. The annual ministerial community forums provide an excellent vehicle for reflection, realignment and reinvigoration. The list of initiatives highlighted in the 2006-07 annual report gives ample evidence of this government’s determination to deliver on those issues that regional people themselves see as being important. Water is the lifeblood of the bush and we understand that our long-term prosperity will be determined by our ability to manage water to sustain economic growth while protecting the natural environment. The B4B annual report outlines the government’s clear success in addressing the issue of water security in regional Queensland. Through initiatives outlined in the statewide water policy and the water resource planning process, regional Queenslanders can have increasing confidence that this government understands the importance of water and is acting to ensure that we put in place sustainable management practices that will meet the needs of water users into the future. Another achievement under the B4B banner has been the great leap forward in measures aimed at securing sustainable primary production through initiatives such as the State Rural Leasehold Land Strategy, the Property Management Systems Initiative and the Reclaim the Bush—A Pest Offensive strategy. These and other initiatives are bringing regional landholders and government agencies to the table where slowly but surely each is benefiting from the establishment of a common set of guiding principles and goals. That is the real achievement of the B4B. The Blueprint for the Bush is a two-way street between the government and the bush. Just as the government is listening to and acting on the knowledge and opinions of rural and regional Queenslanders, they, too, are gaining a new respect for the responsibility of government to govern not just for today but for future generations. Change is in the air and it is a change for the better. I commend the minister for his passion for the B4B and I commend the process as an agent of true partnership between the government and the bush. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Wendt): Before calling the member for Ipswich, I would like to welcome to the gallery students, teachers and parents from the Morayfield East State School, which is represented in this place by Mr Ken Hayward. 3242 Matters of Public Interest 09 Oct 2007

Disability Services Ms NOLAN (Ipswich—ALP) (11.45 am): Last week in Rockhampton I met a lovely woman called Coral Creek. For nearly all her life Coral has helped her mother, who is now 85, to care for Gordon, her 56-year-old profoundly disabled brother. As we chatted over lunch Coral introduced me to her husband to whom she has been married for just two years. She told me that, with Gordon having recently secured a place in a Disability Services Queensland supported house, her mother was about to get a rest and she and her husband were heading off in their caravan. Coral’s story is a beautiful one. It was a pleasure to meet her and, to me, her story spoke of the fundamental change in people’s lives that good support for people with disabilities can provide. When Labor came to office in 1998, disability services had been sadly neglected. In 1998-99, the Commonwealth provided just $64 million a year in disability funding while the state contributed $155 million. The advent of the then Beattie Labor government brought disability services clearly into the light. As shadow minister the now Premier, Anna Bligh, worked closely with the disability sector, listening to the needs of the unmet needs campaign, making commitments to increase funding for disability services and for the first time establishing a stand-alone department. The commitments made were supported enthusiastically by my predecessor, the then Treasurer and member for Ipswich, David Hamill. Those commitments have been met. This year, state funding for disability services has increased to $589 million as part of a total DSQ budget, including HACC and Commonwealth funding, of $1.08 billion. Notably, state funding for disability services has increased 3.8 times since 1998, while the Commonwealth’s share has not even doubled. It is that massive increase in funding that has touched the lives of thousands of Queenslanders, that is giving Coral Creek’s brother a safe and secure place in which to live and which is giving her, for the first time, a taste of freedom. Good disability services, however, are not just about the money. Nearly 10 years on from the establishment of Disability Services Queensland it is also timely that we look seriously at how we can work better with people with disabilities and with the community to provide services in smarter ways. With that in mind, the previous Minister for Disability Services, the very compassionate Warren Pitt, initiated Shared Visions disability conferences. The conferences, held at the Gold Coast in 2005 and 2006, each brought together around 500 people to exchange good ideas and develop a shared vision for a better future for people with disabilities, their carers and their families. The issues discussed included how we continue to make our communities accessible and inclusive for people with disabilities, how the government works genuinely in partnership with the disability sector and how we use the amazing technology available today to improve the quality of life for people with disabilities. The Shared Visions conferences addressed the hard issues and at the same time engendered a great feeling of cooperation among those who attended. Building on that success, the previous minister decided that it was not right that regional Queenslanders should be excluded from the discussion. So this year he took Shared Visions to the regions. Last month when Lindy Nelson-Carr became disability minister and I her parliamentary secretary, the program of 11 regional Shared Visions conferences was underway, and we jumped into it. Together the minister and I attended the Sunshine Coast forum just days after we were both sworn in. Since then I have been to forums in Toowoomba, Hervey Bay and Rockhampton. Appropriately, on 23 October the Shared Visions conference in Ipswich will be the last of the 11 forums and I, perhaps with a degree of parochialism, am confident that it will be the best. The Shared Visions forums are amazing events that demonstrate the best of the human spirit that is so evident in disability services and draw on the community’s good ideas. In recent weeks it has been a pleasure to travel the state to spend time with people with disabilities and their wonderful advocates and carers, and to hear what it is that those people have to say. Minister Nelson-Carr and I look forward to working closely with the disability sector in the years ahead. Needle and Syringe Program Mrs STUCKEY (Currumbin—Lib) (11.50 am): During Mental Health Week it is appropriate that once again I highlight the need for an urgent independent review of Queensland’s needle and syringe programs. In February of this year the shadow minister for health, John-Paul Langbroek, and I called for a review of the Needle and Syringe Program for all of Queensland, and during the estimates hearing in July the health minister indicated that this would be undertaken. Whilst the tendering process for an external review closed on 24 August, from the information I was able to obtain via a question on notice I am not confident that the issues of harm reduction and prevention will be addressed adequately. The current program operating in Queensland has become so diluted it hardly represents the original model. Some facilities have been labelled little more than needle hand-outs. A September report from the federal House of Representatives Standing Committee on Family and Human Services also acknowledges the need for a review of this program, which was legislated 20 years ago. 09 Oct 2007 Matters of Public Interest 3243

I am not at all surprised that Burleigh residents have opposed the QuIHN needle supply facility in their neighbourhood if the type of irresponsible promotion of illegal drug use is like that being promoted by a flyer that found its way into my office. I table the flyer, which I have already tabled this morning during question time. Tabled paper: Copy of a Queensland Injectors Health Network flyer. Concerned Palm Beach residents made it clear they did not want Queensland Health handing out Mixup program brochures at the new local facility either, and I do not blame them. I have witnessed drug deals taking place right across the street from my office in broad daylight. The pamphlet, which is being offered exclusively to injectors, asks them if they ‘wanna make some cash? learn a bit, share a bit and make a bit ($110) in the Mixup project’. It goes on to say that clients will ‘learn about wheel filters, handling overdoses, your legal rights, safer injecting, get free food AND get paid!’ In effect, the pamphlet is encouraging destructive behaviour rather than rehabilitation, and I must say that I fully support rehabilitation. Clearly the pamphlet is sending the wrong message to addicts by only offering advice that will encourage them to remain in the cycle of drug addiction rather than assisting them to become drug free. By funding this program, Queensland Health is condoning the practices of drug addicts and teaching them how to instruct others by offering cash incentives. This left-wing philosophy is grossly irresponsible. Former workers are concerned that in recent times QuIHN, which is a respected facility known for its innovative programs, has moved away from the intent of the original federal legislation that was introduced 20 years ago. NSPs are meant to minimise harm through the spread of disease and also, importantly, to counsel and rehabilitate drug users. NSPs are failing to achieve their potential with regard to drug reduction and rehabilitation, and they require immediate and thorough review. The member for Burleigh staunchly supports these programs and agrees with the QuIHN material that I tabled, which promotes the payment of drug users to coach others, claiming that it helps bring out the underground users. Surely this money would be better spent to assist ex-addicts to counsel IV users in an effort to help them become drug free. It is common knowledge that this government is in favour of bringing in laws that will permanently remove at-risk toddlers and babies from parents. By focusing on harm minimisation over prevention strategies that could stimulate parents to come clean, it is failing to give those people the best chance to rehabilitate. I speak regularly with former addicts and those who have worked for NSPs. They stress the importance for members of parliament to understand that harm minimisation is not synonymous with harm reduction or harm prevention; rather, it is only one of the interventions used. Hepatitis is a notifiable infectious disease carried by a number of IV users, many of whom would not even know that they have the disease as there is little effort to accumulate any data. A number of NSP clients still share needles, and anyone who thinks otherwise has rocks in their heads. I suggest that the member for Burleigh takes off her rose-coloured glasses and speaks out about the failure of her government to provide support services. Why isn’t she banging her fists on the table, demanding that this Labor government properly funds Mirikai at Burleigh, which is in danger of closing its 40-bed residential facility due to chronic underfunding by this government over a number of years? In the Gold Coast Drug Council’s annual report released last month, the wonderful work of Mirikai, Oasis and halfway house programs was well documented, but so too was a call for help to sustain Mirikai’s residential facility. Mirikai provides desperately needed residential rehabilitation, detoxification, counselling, assessment and referral. It gets amazing results and does a miraculous job turning people’s lives around. By doing so, it saves the government a small fortune. The state government has boasted of allocating in its budget half a billion dollars for mental health, yet free services for drug and alcohol counselling are few and far between, highlighting the severe lack of demand reduction resources. It makes one wonder if this government is serious about dealing with this issue and helping those people. I ask the minister to make sure that his review addresses the issues that I have mentioned. Beattie, Mr PD Mr HINCHLIFFE (Stafford—ALP) (11.55 am): I am very keen to place on the record my congratulations to the Premier on her new government and I extend to her my support in her new role. However, at this point I rise to acknowledge the outstanding contribution to the state of Queensland by Peter Beattie. This morning, the Premier paid tribute to Peter Beattie’s time in this House and his nine years as the head of an historic government. However, I wish foremost to express my gratitude to the former member for Brisbane Central for his contribution to the reform of the Queensland branch of the Australian Labor Party. After an earlier experience with Young Labor in 1971, Peter Beattie joined the Labor Party in 1974 in the shadow of the party’s worst-ever electoral defeat. With the state party’s ranks reduced to 11 members and dubbed a cricket team, Peter Beattie joined a party that desperately needed new blood, vision and ideas. Queensland Labor was hamstrung by an organisation that was out of touch and incapable of even envisaging a Labor government. 3244 Matters of Public Interest 09 Oct 2007

After another poor election result for Labor in 1977, Beattie joined a number of others within the ALP who committed themselves to the reform of this state’s oldest political party. Reform was needed to break the power of the small clique that jealously guarded the spoils of defeat. Thankfully, Peter Beattie and others were able to encourage Dr Denis Murphy, the pre-eminent historian and University of Queensland academic, to join the reform movement. As a result of the campaign within the Labor Party, the party in Queensland was reformed, overturning the winner-takes-all system and bringing down barriers to a wider range of Queenslanders, allowing them to feel at home within the party. As president and secretary of the ALP, Denis Murphy and Peter Beattie re-enlivened the party, renewed policy and recruited fresh candidates. Those changes ultimately provided for the election to this parliament of Dr Murphy as one of my predecessors as the member for Stafford. While the tragedy of his death denied the state Dr Murphy’s intelligence and talent, others were preselected and elected who provided the parliamentary party with the renewal and diversity needed to respond to the needs of the state and, ultimately, challenge the Bjelke-Petersen regime. At the 1989 election, Wayne Goss, Keith De Lacy and a number of other members—including Peter Beattie as the member for Brisbane Central—were elected and formed the Goss Labor government. After his 18 years service to the constituents of Brisbane Central, Peter Beattie leaves public life with a parting gift—a result of his commitment to the reform of the ALP—which is an excellent candidate for this Saturday’s by-election. Grace Grace almost perfectly embodies the post-reform candidates for Queensland Labor. As the Premier mentioned this morning, Ms Grace is a lifelong local who has provided outstanding service in a white-collar union and invaluable experience in board rooms, and is also a woman from a non-English-speaking background. I know firsthand how well regarded Grace Grace is in Brisbane’s inner suburbs. I am sure that her hard work and local commitment will be acknowledged this Saturday. In contrast, let us consider the conservatives’ position not only in relation to this Saturday’s by- election, but in relation to reform and renewal of their parliamentary ranks. Conservative voters in the electorate of Brisbane Central are rightly angry at the Liberal and National parties. The Leader of the Liberal Party wanted to contest this Saturday’s by-election but it would appear that the desire of the Liberal Party executive to keep the member for Moggill off the nightly news in the lead-up to an overdue federal election was greater. This is a vote of no-confidence in the Leader of the Liberal Party by his party organisation. But I have some bad news for conservative voters in Brisbane Central and throughout the rest of Queensland: I am not aware of a reform movement within the Liberal Party. There is no Denis Murphy or Peter Beattie committed to the renewal of conservative politics. Peter Beattie’s contribution to the polity of Queensland is unparalleled. As a rank and file party member, as a union official, as a state secretary, as a member of this House, as a minister, as a leader of the opposition and as Premier for nine years, as Premier Bligh said this morning, his wide-ranging contribution has changed Queensland for the better. On behalf of my constituents in the electorate of Stafford and on behalf of Queenslanders throughout the length and breadth of this great state, I thank Peter Beattie for his service and wish him and Heather well for the future.

World Mental Health Day Mr LANGBROEK (Surfers Paradise—Lib) (12.00 pm): I congratulate the Deputy Speaker on his elevation to his current role. Tomorrow marks World Mental Health Day. I take this opportunity to highlight some ominous history and failings in Queensland’s mental health services. I believe that mental health could well be tomorrow’s health crisis. It is a not-so-hidden epidemic in the households of Queensland. The sting that Queenslanders are feeling when it comes to mental health services I fear is just the tip of the iceberg. Queensland has one of the highest suicide rates in the country yet mental health spending in Queensland is only 80 per cent of the national average. This morning we heard the new Premier come in here twice and speak about ambulance spending, saying it is the highest per person in Australia. That is proof that throwing money does not always help to overcome a problem, as in the case of ambulance services, but in mental health not throwing money at it is definitely not helping the problem. The Premier cannot come in here as she did on a number of occasions this morning and blame the Bjelke-Petersen government for failings in mental health spending two decades ago when she and I were at university together. Why does the Premier not come in here and tell us whether she believes in all the things she believed in at university, such as patriarchal tyranny? Why does the Premier not tell us whether she believes in all those things that she believed in two decades ago? We are seeing the new made-over Premier. In Queensland vulnerable adolescents are being forced into adult mental health facilities because there are no specialised adolescent mental health beds outside south-east Queensland. In Cairns 20 teenagers were admitted to Cairns Base Hospital’s mental health unit in the year to July 31. There are no specialist adolescent mental health beds in Cairns. Accurate statistics are hard to ascertain for far- north Queensland because there are hundreds if not thousands of youthful sufferers who need support. 09 Oct 2007 Matters of Public Interest 3245

Statistics show that one in five people will suffer some form of mental illness in their lifetime. Many of these victims of psychiatric conditions are teenagers struggling with the challenges of adolescence. In spite of that, this financial year only eight new mental health beds for troubled teens will be opened in Queensland. There are only 15 dedicated adolescent mental health beds in Queensland and every one of those is in Brisbane. This means that kids in Cairns, Townsville, Rockhampton, Mackay, Toowoomba and other regional centres—even the Gold Coast, the sixth largest city in Australia—are forced into adult mental health facilities with little supervision. Not only is this inappropriate, it represents a danger to the health and safety of patients, not to mention the liability issues that arise from such arrangements. I note that the member for Toowoomba South is in the chamber. He is very aware of the sorts of things that have happened in Toowoomba recently. Not only is the crisis in mental health wreaking havoc in our hospitals, the crisis is playing out on our streets. As a result of this government’s gross underinvestment in Queensland’s mental health services, people with mental illnesses are being sent back into the community without any treatment. Members of this House will be aware of constituents who contact them about incidents in shopping centres, train stations, buses, households and schools where people with mental illnesses are out in the community and end up being dealt with by police officers. It is putting the community at risk and placing our police officers and patients in danger as well. There is a real concern in the community about the lack of investment by this government in mental health services that will lead to more and more incidents. This Labor government is taking its eye off the ball. It advocated for deinstitutionalisation but failed to put in place alternative treatment options to assist people along the road to recovery. Our acute care facilities simply cannot cope with the demand. It was interesting this morning listening to the Premier talk about how her government’s health reforms are taking effect. Yet every day distressed patients contact me because for them Queensland Health has not turned the corner. Our public hospital waiting lists are the longest that they have ever been. Some of the 144,000 Queenslanders waiting to see a specialist will never, ever get an appointment. Mental health is just one area of the health system where this government has failed Queenslanders. The same Premier who insists that Queensland Health has turned the corner—contrary to the evidence against her claims—is unapologetic and apathetic about the serious lack of investment in mental health services in Queensland. In May the then Treasurer, now Premier, put out a media release admitting that her injection of funds into mental health services meant that funding for mental health services fell far short of the national average. This funding is not enough to make up for a decade of short-changing mental health services by this government. I am pleased that the health minister mentioned my federal colleagues this morning as I would like to bring to his attention some of the initiatives coming out of Canberra which I hope, for the sake of Queenslanders, will inspire him to action. The federal government is investing almost $2 billion in services for people with mental illnesses, their families and carers. We need to acknowledge the wonderful clinicians and staff who do a fantastic job under the most difficult circumstances. I have been fortunate to visit many public hospitals, including mental health facilities in Toowoomba and Townsville. The member for Toowoomba South and I went to Toowoomba Hospital a couple of months ago. It is quite remarkable what goes on on the ground in mental health wards. We need to deliver better services for Queenslanders and we need to attract and retain mental health staff. Working in the mental health wards is one of the hardest, most thankless jobs that there is. If the Bligh government is really committed to improving the state of mental health services in Queensland it must improve the working conditions of mental health staff—that should be an immediate priority—as well as implement the recommendations of Brendan Butler, which this government has ignored to date. The Australian government does recognise the significant challenge of mental health— Time expired. African Refugees Mrs SCOTT (Woodridge—ALP) (12.05 pm): I take this opportunity to congratulate the Premier and wish her well in her new role. I was horrified and dismayed at the recent utterings by federal minister Kevin Andrews where he described some of our Sudanese young people who have come to Australia under our humanitarian refugee program as displaying delinquency, having poor education standards, failing to fit into our community and having an aversion to work. I wish to refute his words in the strongest possible terms from personal experience almost on a daily basis. The African refugees are beautiful people, particularly those from the Sudan. Many have settled in the electorate of Woodridge and they have found there a welcoming community eager to assist them to settle into their new homeland and they, in turn, are eager to learn our language, encourage their children in their schooling, get their driving licence, learn skills and gain employment. More than that, they are reaching out to other refugee groups as they arrive. Many are taking on leadership roles and forming volunteer groups to assist community members. Logan City boasts 160-plus cultural groups, 3246 Matters of Public Interest 09 Oct 2007 with hundreds of African refugees from the Sudan, Burundi, Congo, Eritrea, Kenya, Tanzania, Ethiopia and, more recently, refugees from Burma. This is truly a harmonious community. I cannot imagine our many celebrations without the colour and exuberance that they bring. I am proud of the services offered by our government, in particular in skills training in such programs as the Community Jobs Plan through Skilling Queenslanders for Work which has provided the opportunity for hundreds of our refugees to gain skills and enter the workforce. This, of course, has involved partnering with our TAFE college, Logan campus, Logan City Council, Community Renewal and many employers keen to welcome the participants as valued employees. The support services in Logan are second to none. ACCES Services, through its very dedicated team of workers and volunteers, has initiated remarkable services that have responded to the needs of its clients. They meet families and individuals at the airport and, for the first six months, offer intensive support to house them and introduce them to a whole new way of life with many household appliances they have never seen before and a way of existence totally foreign to anything they have experienced. Some of them have spent up to 20 years in refugee camps and their stories can be heart-wrenching. Often many of their family members have been killed and the hardships they have suffered are often indescribable. But their smiles and enthusiasm for life in Australia are something you simply cannot ignore. I attend ACCES almost on a monthly basis to offer congratulations and certificates to our new community members as they graduate from their CJP course. Invariably the majority will already have obtained work in such areas as child care, aged care, office administration and so on. They speak confidently of their future. They are grateful for the wonderful opportunities that they have found here in their new home. ACCES offers many services and programs such as personal support, trauma counselling, employment training, and support and youth services. It even has its own driving school. Our community health centre offers refugee services including health and dental checks and immunisation. Departments such as our Police Service assist in familiarising our new arrivals with the services that they offer and also the responsibilities of living in our community. Another of our services, Multilink, was recently recognised by Minister Nelson-Carr for its community service to our migrant and refugee community. Its programs cover services for many different cultural and language groups including interpreter services, respite services, youth and children’s services such as playgroups, crime prevention and assisting parents back to work. They offer cultural awareness programs which enlighten many of those who work in the area. A visit to many of the schools in Logan City will reveal many dedicated principals, teachers and teacher aides working with our African children. Woodridge primary has the largest group, with close to 100, and it is hoped that in the future a special resource centre will be built and will operate to give greater assistance to our children and their parents. In contrast to the comment by Gary Hardgrave that his community was ‘exhausted’ by the intake of African refugees, I have to say that the community in Logan embraces the opportunities to assist our refugees. Equine Influenza Mr HORAN (Toowoomba South—NPA) (12.10 pm): In the midst of the equine influenza crisis that is occurring throughout south-east Queensland, I want to speak today about two important things that need to be done—and, that is, vaccination of all horses in the red zone of south-east Queensland and a fair system to provide the vaccine to those people who own pleasure and performance horses. Since this outbreak first occurred in Queensland on 25 August, we have gone from one or two outbreaks to 799 by Sunday evening. As at Friday evening of last week it was 626. So this is spreading like wildfire throughout south-east Queensland. To have the minister come into the parliament this morning and say in a ministerial statement that stopping the spread of equine influenza has been a tremendous success, that it only covers less than one per cent of the land mass of Queensland, and that the buffer zone around the red zone is a success, is paying no respect whatsoever to the intelligence of horse people throughout south-east Queensland. It has spread from zero to 799 properties, and it would be far greater if we knew the true extent of how many properties are actually infected. What we have today with this crisis is a legacy of five years of the DPI budget being cut, staff and resources being underfunded and cut, and a culture of leadership developing at the top where regardless of their experience in other departments they have no experience in animal or agricultural industries. The chickens have come home to roost with many of the mistakes that occurred in this crisis, despite the hard work on the ground of underresourced staff and underfunded staff who have attempted to deal with this crisis. With regard to vaccinations, back on 14 September I called for the department to consider vaccinating horses throughout the red zone, because all the major equine practices I spoke to said that it had to be done. They said we were the laughing stock of the world to think that we were going to stop 09 Oct 2007 Matters of Public Interest 3247 the spread of EI throughout south-east Queensland. I spoke to practices who had vets who had worked in equine influenza areas of the UK, Europe, Florida, and South Africa. Kicking and screaming, the department was dragged to the conclusion that it would have to vaccinate. Since then some 20,000 doses arrived in the first lot, and a bit over a week ago Queensland got just on 8,000 doses and vaccinated most of the racehorses in work and some of the horses in the buffer zone that extends from south of Gympie across to Dalby and down to Inglewood. On Friday night 130,000 doses arrived, and out of those 130,000 I believe that Queensland will get about 35,000 doses. Bear in mind that 8,000 of those doses are going to have to be used for the second vaccination of the horses which were vaccinated a week and a bit ago. The real issue that we have is that the thoroughbred industry has approximately 25,000 horses, which means they need about 50,000 doses of vaccine. The thoroughbred industry is extremely important in this state, as is the standardbred industry but it accounts for approximately 18 per cent of the horses in south-east Queensland. There are probably 80,000 to 100,000 or more of pleasure and performance horses that require vaccination if they are to be protected. This has also become an issue of animal welfare. As the temperature rises with the hot summer weather, horses with temperatures over 40 degrees suffering these illnesses out in paddocks trying to find some shade, not able to be looked after like horses in stables and so forth, need to be vaccinated to protect them from this sickness. The owners of these horses want to protect them from this influenza. They see that the government cannot stop it and they want to take it into their own hands and be able to provide this vaccination for their horses. It is so important with the next lot of vaccine that has just arrived—the 130,000 doses, and in four weeks time there will be another 100,000 doses—that we have a fair system of allocating it to horses who are in all these hot spots across the length and breadth of south-east Queensland. Take a line from Brisbane across to Toowoomba and south: just about the whole area is full of EI. We need a fair system for performance and pleasure horses. It is insulting to talk about ‘high-value horses’, because a 24-year- old kid’s pony is just as important as a breeding stallion, a brood mare or an endurance horse. We need a fair system so that those who are at most risk of getting the illness are provided with the vaccine. I call for vaccination, vaccination, vaccination and communication, communication, communication so that not only the thoroughbred industry but also the pleasure and performance horse industry can be protected. Time expired. True Sport Lives Here Initiative Mr BOMBOLAS (Chatsworth—ALP) (12.16 pm): I want to inform the House about an excellent program inspiring kids all across Queensland to be good sports. The True Sport Lives Here initiative, developed by the department of sport and recreation, is helping local sporting clubs encourage positive behaviour and build a true sports culture within their communities. This is really important at a time when obesity rates and associated health problems are on the rise and we need to keep our kids active and involved. The initiative involves a series of workshops open to all junior sports administrators, coaches and parents designed to explain how the initiative can be effectively implemented within a club environment. These workshops kicked off today in Townsville, where those involved with local clubs are enjoying the opportunity to learn how we can promote good sportsmanship and positive behaviour among our youngsters. Those attending the workshops also receive a resource kit which includes codes of ethics, fact sheets, ideas for generating local media coverage on fair play, as well as a CD of recorded ground announcements featuring elite athletes talking about the values of true sport. The message of being a good sport is one we have to get right out there. Unfortunately, despite recent progress we continue to witness inappropriate incidents at junior sporting matches including violence, racism, verbal abuse towards referees and players, a win at all costs mentality from coaches and even overbearing pressure from parents on the sidelines. This kind of behaviour on the sports field can easily overflow into other areas of a child’s life and, with the current attention on the prevalence of youth violence, it is essential we look at all ways to prevent such negative behaviour. This is a grassroots project that acknowledges the best way to encourage and eventually effect community change is to work with those communities involved. Sporting groups around the state are embracing this concept, with 26 sporting organisations committing to being true sport leaders since the launch of the initiative in June this year. Those 26 organisations will have the capacity to expose over 300,000 junior participants statewide to this initiative, after attending the workshop scheduled to run in Cairns, Maroochydore, Brisbane, Toowoomba and Rockhampton later this month. By providing this information and support directly to the coaches, parents and organisers at local sporting clubs, we can empower community organisations to take hold of the issue and send a message of good sportsmanship to all of our kids. I am confident many more groups will come on board once they see the success of those clubs already getting involved. 3248 Matters of Public Interest 09 Oct 2007

We have also engaged true sport ambassadors—well-known sporting celebrities—who are right behind this program to be good role models and to encourage good sportsmanship by coaches, officials, parents and players. These include Queensland Rugby League legend Steve Renouf; Commonwealth record holder, swimmer Jessica Schipper; and captain of the Queensland Firebirds, netballer Peta Stephens. This government is committed to working with local communities on programs like this to ensure that all of our children are provided with fun and safe opportunities to get active in Queensland. In this year’s budget the government allocated $260,000 for the True Sport Lives Here program. This comes on top of the $200,000 provided for the program last financial year. This significant funding will allow for the development of education and training resources, including the delivery of 22 true sport workshops across the state this year. It will allow the department of sport and recreation to establish and develop partnerships with state sporting organisations to promote and implement the true sport message within their club network and will also cover the cost of promoting this message to the whole state. The health of our children is paramount and very important. It is excellent to see local sporting organisations working with the government to address concerns about sportsmanship and provide children with the best chance of a healthy, active and fun life in sport. I must say I was proud to be involved in the award presentations for both the juniors and seniors at the Easts Carina Rugby League Club in the heart of Chatsworth, the electorate I represent. Both events went off without a hitch with everyone showing exemplary behaviour. As patron of the Easts Carina Juniors, I can proudly advise the House that the club boasted 496 juniors on its books this season. From 26 junior teams, there were premierships in the under 14s and under 15s, with the under 11s, under 12s, under 14s, under 16s and under 18s also making the semis as did both senior teams. I would like to congratulate the club on its performance in 2007 and thank the coaches, managers and administrators as well as sponsors and supporters for their commitment to the Tigers. Lastly, I say to the players: well done and keep up the great work. To the dedicated mums and dads, I say thanks for supporting your kids and giving them every chance to play the greatest game of all. Road Safety Mr FOLEY (Maryborough—Ind) (12.20 pm): As the deputy chairman of the parliamentary Travelsafe Committee, I and my other committee members are dismayed to watch the nightly news and see the carnage on our roads and the absolutely stupid behaviour that is indulged in by a small group of Queenslanders, such as wheel stands on motorbikes and other things, that is filmed from other vehicles. I also notice that Queensland police have established a new program of video-recording stupid drivers going about their idiotic business. They go the person’s house later on to show them the evidence and confront them with their own behaviour. Noticeably in the news report it said that they very quickly own up to their behaviour when they see it on video. That is a much better outcome than endangering people’s lives through high-speed pursuits. Nothing can be sadder than a family who has been robbed of a loved family member because they were inadvertently caught up in a high-speed pursuit. I am also very pleased to report that, after years of constant lobbying, one of my constituents who is a truck driver—he has argued for a long time that a black box type recorder or camera device mounted in a truck could easily capture stupid behaviour and lead to later prosecution—has now completed what he calls a black box unit designed to be mounted on a truck. It can have up to four cameras and up to 10 days recording time. It stores the video onto a hard drive which connects to a laptop via a USB. It is remote control operable. It is a wonderful way to enhance road safety. I recently brought this to the previous transport minister’s attention and he asked me for more detail. I thought this would be the appropriate place to do that. As a professional truck driver, my constituent has been concerned for years about the number of incidents that he and other truck drivers witness during a typical driver’s working day. In a lot of cases when a truck driver is involved in a traffic accident the blame is levelled at the truckie. Of course, as I have said before, there have been numerous stories showing that it is not the truckies who are the villains but those who carry out some of this absolutely stupid behaviour. I am not saying that all truck drivers are saints in terms of their behaviour or anything like that. However, to have a system that watches the road and captures incidents on video is a great thing. The truck driver could simply note when he or she sees stupid behaviour. It can then be recalled and watched. It is a reasonably inexpensive system. This type of black box recording system could also be used in buses and other transport vehicles. In a lot of ways we could have free monitoring of roads like the Bruce Highway. It brings about a situation in which the police, who are already stretched to capacity and do not always have the physical manpower to monitor the roads as carefully as they might like to if they had an unlimited budget, have other people doing that work for them. Some people may be concerned and say that it is un-Australian because it might bring about a culture of people dobbing in their mates. However, let me say that people who drive at ridiculous speeds and take stupid risks and ignore the road laws are nobody’s mates and deserve to feel the full force of the law. 09 Oct 2007 Matters of Public Interest 3249

The whole system needs to be looked at. If there were some state government or even federal government incentives to encourage truck drivers to mount these cameras in their vehicles to record the behaviour, that could be a tremendous adjunct to road safety efforts. Switching to another truck related issue, I have also had a lot of representations from truckies in my electorate who are very concerned that they are being urged by state government advertising to stop and rest up but there is really nowhere to do that. One of my constituents claims that the transport inspectors came along and gave him a $350 fine for sleeping in a truck that did not have a sleeper cab, even though he had pulled over because he was very fatigued from a long drive and sun glaring in the window. Most country towns and major cities now have a two-hour parking limit. Clearly these areas need to be looked at. Murrumba Downs, Bruce Highway On-Ramp Hon. DM WELLS (Murrumba—ALP) (12.26 pm): Towards the end of August I was honoured to receive a letter from Peter Dutton MP, federal member for Dickson and Minister for Revenue and Assistant Treasurer. He said in part that he thought there was an urgent need for a new on-ramp to the Bruce Highway at Murrumba Downs. It continued— The Federal Government has now committed half of the funding required for this proposal, but we are not able to proceed without the full support and further commitment from the State Government. Delighted as I always am to hear of money being committed to my electorate, I immediately went off and scoured through the federal budgetary papers to see if I could find any line item relating to this alleged commitment. Imagine my disappointment when I found that the federal budgetary papers committed all sorts of proposed improvements to the Bruce Highway but nothing was committed to the building of an additional on-ramp for the Bruce Highway at Dohles Rocks. Of course there are, as anyone who has ever been in love knows, different levels of commitment. So I went off to the state Department of Main Roads to see if the federal government had ever committed itself to them. Imagine my surprise when I discovered that no correspondence had been received by the minister or his department from the federal government relating to an additional on-ramp. I would think that, if the federal government was committed to building the on-ramps as Mr Dutton says and wanted the state to match its commitment, it would have told the party it wanted the commitment. Most people, when they are making a commitment to someone, tell the other person. Mr Dutton reminds me of the words of the old pop song that goes, ‘I’ve told every little star just how great I think you are. Why haven’t I told you?’ Indeed, the minister was surprised that the federal government would want to install north-facing on-ramps only a few years after the completion of the fully federally funded upgrade of this section of the Bruce Highway. The federal government did not want to include on-ramps then when it would have been efficient to do so and it did not propose to include them in the Brisbane-Cairns AusLink Strategy—the Bruce Highway—in late 2005. Indeed, the federal government’s commitment to these on-ramps seems to be something that exists only in the mind of Peter Dutton and which seems to come to the forefront of his mind only in election years. The federal government has other commitments which militate against the on-ramp to the Bruce Highway. These include commitments to certain standards that the federal government establishes for the building of freeways. One is that the federal government has always sought to preserve the integrity of the Bruce Highway as an inner city route and has actively sought to discourage local traffic from using the Bruce Highway. Secondly, federally funded highways are built with significant spacing between interchanges to ensure safe distances for traffic weaving movements. The idea is to avoid unsafe weaving movements along high-speed interregional roads. Indeed this safety factor was, I am advised, the reason the federal government did not build the on-ramps when the whole of the highway was upgraded a few years ago. This philosophy is found in a federal government document entitled Austroads Design Guide for Grade Separations. However, let me not make light of Peter Dutton’s commitment, unfounded though it is and inconsistent with other commitments as it is. Undoubtedly Mr Dutton believes, or at least in this election year believes, that it should be done. He imagines there is some impediment from the state government. Elsewhere in his letter he says that a commitment from the state government is necessary as the ramps are to be built on state land and will be connecting state roads. Well, they will not be. The Dohles Rocks Road ramp would connect with Dohles Rocks Road, which is a Pine Rivers Shire Council road and not a state government road. However, the state minister for main roads has indicated that if the federal government wished to undertake further upgrades of the Bruce Highway, including a north-facing ramp at Dohles Rocks Road, the Department of Main Roads would fully cooperate. I have replied to the letter from Peter Dutton and my ‘Dear Peter’ letter reads in part, ‘If you are committed to having an on-ramp at Dohles Rocks Road then you should convince your Canberra colleagues to support it and then go ahead and get it built.’ But I bet they will not. In the unlikely event that they are returned to power, their inconsistent commitment issues will stop them from building it. One of the refreshing things about having Fiona McNamara as the next federal member for Dickson is that we will have a federal member who knows that the Bruce Highway is a federal highway and that Dohles Rocks Road is a local road. 3250 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 09 Oct 2007

TRANSPORT LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL

Second Reading Resumed from 6 September (see p. 3147). Mr JOHNSON (Gregory—NPA) (12.32 pm): The shadow minister is currently engaged and will deliver his speech later in the debate. With the change in leadership of the government I extend my sincere congratulations to the Hon. Anna Bligh on her elevation to Premier of this state. At the same time I congratulate the member for Logan, the Hon. John Mickel, on his elevation to the position as minister for transport and other areas of responsibility. I say at the outset that I think that this is one of the most important portfolios in the state. I was honoured to be the minister for this portfolio for some 2½ years. When we have people like Bruce Wilson, the director-general—a man of great decency, great integrity, honesty and loyalty—I believe the department is in good hands. I wish the minister well in his term as minister for transport. I, in conjunction with my colleague the member for Clayfield, look forward to working with the minister in a constructive and positive way to see that we get some genuinely good outcomes for Queensland Transport. There are other great people in that department. It is a great department to work with. The Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 2007 canvasses a host of areas, in particular the heavy transport industry and the taxi and limousine industry. The opposition will support this legislation, which makes amendments to the TORUMs legislation. In recent years we have made changes to the heavy vehicle industry. There certainly have to be changes which are in the best interests of the industry. For too long we have witnessed this industry be the victim of vicious attacks by people outside the industry who believe that people in this industry are a mob of crooks and a mob of shonks who have done and continue to do the wrong thing. I am sick and tired of the heavy transport industry being victimised and criticised every day of the week for the errors on our highways, the things they subject the general public to in the area of road safety, the decimation of our road infrastructure and many other issues. People blame the truckies. It is not always the truckie who makes the mistake but someone else who does not understand how the truckie operates that makes the mistake. I believe that with the stringent driving laws we have in this state our heavy transport operators are certainly amongst the best operators in the land. There is always going to be a cowboy element but I think that cowboy element has just about come to an end. On numerous occasions in this House I have supported legislation that makes our roads safer, makes our industry more competitive and makes it more fruitful for the operators in question and their bottom line. The one good thing about the legislation before us today is the chain of responsibility for heavy users. Many people in this House will not realise that if a truckie loads cattle at somewhere like Tambo or Sarina and has deadlines to meet a kill time at, say, AMH at Dinmore or Teys Brothers at Beenleigh then he only has to have one little thing go wrong and he cannot meet the deadline in question. When I was minister I put in place a four-hour concession to unload livestock. The same applies to the grain industry. At that time we put in place the 7.5 per cent overload tolerance. I believe these to be fair and responsible decisions for the transport industry. It comes back to the issue of driving hours, driving times and responsibility. I refer today to the chain of responsibility. If those cattle or that produce has to be loaded at a certain time to meet market deadlines it is also up to the consignor and consignee to make certain that that operator can get those goods, whatever they may be, to the market in the allotted time and not force the operator to break the law and subject other road users to an unsafe driving environment. I will use as an example Nolans Transport at Gatton. They are a classic example of a company meeting deadlines. When they load their fruit and vegetable trucks they have deadlines to meet at the Sydney markets. They have only to get a flat on the inside dual tyre or two flats in the middle of the night and they can lose half to three-quarters of an hour changing that inside dual tyre, especially if it is in driving rain or unfavourable conditions. The same thing applies to the livestock industry or any other freight industry. I congratulate the minister and the government on the chain of responsibility provisions. They are long overdue. For too long the operators have borne the brunt of this. Most times it is the drivers of those heavy vehicles that cop the brunt of the law. I think fair is fair. The industry will now be playing a responsible role. One thing I want to touch on is volumetric loading. I made mention of the 7.5 per cent overloading. I want to make reference to the volumetric loading of livestock vehicles. I noted in the minister’s second reading speech—and I raised this with the minister’s departmental people yesterday—the mention of unloading livestock because the configuration is too heavy or whatever the case may be. This comes back to the chain of responsibility. I implore the minister to keep a watchful eye on this. 09 Oct 2007 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 3251

Queensland has a very sacred agreement in terms of volumetric loading that has certainly been beneficial and advantageous to the ongoing viability of our livestock industry in this state over a long time. Queensland is a very decentralised state, and the majority of our livestock is produced in the south-east corner and sent to saleyards at Roma or Toowoomba or slaughtered at Ipswich or Beenleigh. Townsville, Mackay, Biloela and Rockhampton are also major slaughtering centres across our state. However, we have to remember that Queensland is the beneficiary of industry produced in the Northern Territory. Before those configurations cross the Queensland border, they are not subject to logbooks or driving time regimes that govern the operation of those heavy vehicles. As soon as they cross the Queensland border, they enter a timed zone and have to fill in logbooks and abide by the rules of the road as set down by Queensland Transport. This is an issue that I want to touch on briefly with the new minister, Mr Mickel. Queensland is the only state in the Commonwealth that penalises drivers for a breach of a logbook with the loss of demerit points as well as serious fines, and this has been an impost on the industry. The ‘cowboy’ element has always been there and always will be. It is up to us as legislators and as responsible citizens to ensure that we have a clean industry and an industry that we can be proud of. In defence of the heavy road transport industry, it has come a long way in the last 15 or 20 years because industry has put in place a lot of those structures itself and those bodies have come to ministers and government and made representations on behalf of their industry for better outcomes— bodies such as the RTA, the LTAQ and the ATAQ. These operations are responsible bodies trying to get genuine outcomes for their industry and at the end of the day for end users—that is, patrons of transport in Queensland. When I say ‘transport’, everybody who lives in this country is affected by transport in one way or another—whether it be road, rail or some other means of transport. It is a very important function in terms of the ongoing viability of not only our state but also our nation. The other issue I want to touch on—and I know that the department of transport and main roads has been split—is roads. The government has to pay very important attention to the upgrade and the maintenance of our roads. After speaking with some of the minister’s people yesterday, they are on the right track in relation to identifying how we can upgrade the major arteries—the main conveyors—of freight and goods in this state. Those major arteries such as the Bruce Highway, the Warrego Highway, the Landsborough Highway, the Barkly Highway, the Gore Highway and the New England Highway are all federal highways. I salute and congratulate the federal government on its recent announcement of $2 billion for the upgrade of the Bruce Highway, because we have been waiting for a long time for money to be spent on that road. I hope that we will see some of those black spots addressed. We talk about idiots on our roads and often blame the truckies on the Bruce Highway and other roads—and I know there are people in this House who travel that road on numerous occasions—but I was going from Gympie to Maryborough last week and saw an absolute bloody fool pass three cars on double white lines. You cannot race up and take his numberplate. The police cannot be everywhere, but these are the types of idiots who have sent our road toll up to 270-odd. That is too high for Queensland and too high for any Westernised democracy. The general public should be dobbing in these sorts of idiots to the police or to the authorities because of their irresponsible driving habits. It is a matter of being patient on the roads. It is a matter of being courteous on the roads, and I believe that people in the transport industry are some of the most courteous people on our roads. How often do we see a stupid accident as a result of impatience involving a heavy or large vehicle? It is always because somebody is impatient, somebody is champing at the bit to get past. When they do get past, they get held up again behind another convoy of vehicles. Patience is a virtue in terms of making our road environment safer. At the same time it is not about penalising the transport industry; it is about being fair and understanding of all road users. With regard to the chain of responsibility in the transport industry in New South Wales—and no doubt the shadow minister will elaborate further on this—something like $16 million in fines has been received as a result of the violation of chain of responsibility. In Queensland at the moment it is just a little bit over $1 million. I urge people right across the industry—this is something that I will certainly be conveying to industry in my area of responsibility in terms of business operators as well as the industry itself—that it is important to realise that drivers cannot get into one of those vehicles and drive it from A to B in a given time. The drivers have to have a rest and have to pull up to check their vehicles and check their loads and everything else. I have heard blokes say that they have got into a Toyota LandCruiser wagon at Mount Isa and driven all night through to get to Brisbane. You hear blokes do it and skite about how they did it in 20 hours or whatever. A truckie cannot do that sort of thing. That LandCruiser may have five or six passengers, and if they run into a truck or a bus on the way you can bet your bottom dollar that the truck operator or the bus operator will be blamed for the fatalities because of this absolute stupidity. I support the government with these rules and regulations that are making our industry and our roads safer. At the same time, the compliance comes back also to the end user, the consignee and the consignor. With the technology that is available today, we have reached an era in heavy transport where we can monitor and govern the conveyance of goods in terms of the time allotted for travelling and the time spent on and off the road. However, we also have to look at the responsibility of general drivers on our roads. 3252 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 09 Oct 2007

In the short time I have left, I also want to touch on the taxi industry and the limousine industry. I believe the taxi industry is the most sacred form of public transport in this state and this nation. We should all take a leaf out of the New Zealand book in terms of what happened over there many years ago when it deregulated the industry. All types of crooks and thieves ended up driving cabs, and that is a situation we do not want to see in Queensland. We have an industry that we can be fiercely proud of, but at the same time we have to ensure that we do keep it divorced somewhat from the limousine industry in that the limousine industry provides a different service altogether to the taxi industry. Whilst the cost of plates ranges from $100,000 for a limo up to, say, $450,000 for a cab, the cab industry is a unique industry. It is time we took a long, hard look at the cost of plates and the number of plates available in certain areas, and the issue comes back to the availability of cabs at a certain time. I am a big user of cabs around the city. A lot of cabbies say to me, ‘Vaughan, we don’t bother driving at night-time now because we don’t know whether we’re going to get paid, especially Friday and Saturday nights.’ This is a sad indictment on a very professional industry, and governments of both persuasions over a long period of time have tried to put in place safeguards for that industry. I congratulate the government for the introduction of safety cameras in cabs. That has certainly tightened up security in that industry and made it a safer environment, especially in terms of fare evaders. If we have 500 or 600 cabs sitting idle on a Friday or a Saturday night because cab owners do not want to put up with the scum of society or those idiots who do not want to pay the fare and do a runner, that is a sad indictment on an industry that is truly professional. We have to look very closely at how we can help the industry overcome this problem. There are all types in society, but at the end of the day I believe we have to keep the industry independent as it is currently. People talk about deregulation, but these cabs are people’s superannuation. For a lot of them it is their business. It is absolutely paramount that we do not destroy the value of their asset and their opportunity to progress the industry. At the same time we have to keep that mantle of safety that that industry provides. What other form of public transport drops us, our wives or our children off at our homes in the middle of the night and shines a light to see that we get in the door? I would not care if it costs me $50 to go five miles. I really think that the industry needs to be provided with some more security and some more understanding. There are many other aspects of this legislation that are certainly going to be made public as the weeks progress. In the minute left available to me I want to talk about the issue of drug testing of vehicle operators, which I believe will be introduced in Queensland on 1 December 2007. I applaud this initiative. I cannot wait for it to happen. We have drink-driving laws, but people are still thumbing their noses at them. I say to the government today that we have to start throwing the book at these people so that we can make our environment safer. I thank Mike Stapleton, Tim Hansen and Wendy Bullock from the department and Cathy Savage from the minister’s office for briefing us on the amendments yesterday. I look forward to working with the minister in conjunction with my colleague the shadow minister the member for Clayfield in progressing the great work that can happen and will happen through the department of transport. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Moorhead): Order! I call the member for Clayfield. Mr Lawlor: Nice shirt. Mr NICHOLLS (Clayfield—Lib) (12.52 pm): I am happy to provide the sartorially challenged member for Southport with some advice on clothing in the future. There is no problem with that. At the outset can I confirm— Mr Reeves: You could have got a candidate to dress like you for Brisbane Central. Mr NICHOLLS: He would have had both red and blue. At the outset I confirm that the coalition will be supporting the bill, including the amendments that I understand the minister will move during the consideration in detail stage. I also flag that we have some very real concerns about parts of the legislation and parts of the consultation process that was carried out in respect of some parts of the legislation. The bill amends the Maritime and Other Legislation Amendment Act, the Transport Infrastructure Act, the Transport Operations (Marine Pollution) Act, the Transport Operations (Passenger Transport) Act, the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act and the Transport Planning and Coordination Act. The most significant areas of change relate to the implementation of the Road Transport Reform (Compliance and Enforcement) Bill 2003, which was prepared under the auspices of the National Transport Commission as a result of a COAG agreement to try to harmonise road freight laws across jurisdictions to improve the efficiency, safety and viability of the road transport industry. The second area of significant change brought about by this legislation is to the taxi and limousine industry. This bill implements changes arising as a result of the taxi and limousine industry development package, which was approved by cabinet and government in November 2006. Other changes in the legislation address issues relating to the powers of the government to acquire land for specified purposes, including for public-private partnerships initiated in relation to major infrastructure. 09 Oct 2007 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 3253

The most prominent example of those at the moment is the PPP for the development of the Airport Link project—a project initiated by the Brisbane City Council under the leadership of Campbell Newman and which is now being undertaken by the state government using a company called City North Infrastructure Pty Ltd. The bill also remedies an operational mistake that was made in 2000 by this government in relation to the acquisition of busway properties where it seems that the wrong director-general has been acquiring property. The bill also brings some legislation relating to marine pollution from ships into line with new definitions for noxious liquid substances. I turn firstly to the reforms that the bill makes to the taxi and limousine industry. In prior debates in this House I have raised the issue of the failures of this government, be it led by Mr Beattie or Ms Bligh, to plan properly for growth and to act responsibly in dealing with long-term planning and growth issues. Those issues have been highlighted in water security, health, child care, electricity supply and more recently in ambulance services and police. We now have another failure to add to the litany of failures of Labor in government: the failure to plan for growing demand for taxi services and personalised transport, such as that provided by the limousine industry. The 2006 Australian Taxi Industry Association Queensland report says it all in terms of this government’s failure to act. Its annual report states that, disappointingly for the taxi council, there was little progress made in regard to finalising the national competition policy reform process or on an acceptable taxi industry code of practice. That is the report card from the taxi industry for 2006. The history of the taxi and limousine industry reform package is quite complex and I would like to detail it for the House. In December 1998—that is now nine years ago—the NCP review of the Transport Operations (Passenger Transport) Act commenced. That review took about 12 months and the report was released in September 2000—some seven years ago. It then took the Labor government three years—until August 2003—to commit to actioning recommendations contained in that report. That was three long years. The reform committee to discuss the recommendations met in February 2005, but has not met since. So it has not met for over 2½ years. Despite the absence of that particular committee to meet, a package of 14 initiatives was finally endorsed in November 2006 and then introduced in dribs and drabs. We see four items of that package in this bill that we are debating today. So seven years after the NCP report was handed down, three years after the government’s response, 2½ years after the first committee meeting of an implementation committee that never met again, we finally see some legislation to address these issues. Given the tardiness of the response of this government to issues which are vitally important to a major sector of our public transport network, it is no surprise that the taxi industry and the limousine industry question why they bother. It is not only the taxi industry, with some 3,000 plus licences on issue at an average cost of $405,000 each, which is disgruntled with the decisions of this government—or the failure of this government to decide—but also the limousine industry. It is being treated with contempt. I now seek leave to table for the information of members a number of pieces of correspondence: a letter from the Limousine Association Queensland to the minister for transport, dated 30 September 2007; a letter from the Limousine Association Queensland to the Premier, dated the same date, 30 September 2007; and a letter from the Limousine Association Queensland to the minister dated 3 October 2007. Leave granted. Tabled paper: Copy of letter, dated 30 September 2007, from John Quane, President, Limousine Association Queensland Inc to the Minister for Transport in relation to the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill. Tabled paper: Copy of letter, dated 30 September 2007, from John Quane, President, Limousine Association Queensland Inc to the Premier in relation to the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill. Tabled paper: Copy of letter, dated 3 October 2007, from John Quane, President, Limousine Association Queensland Inc to the Minister for Transport in relation to the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill. Mr NICHOLLS: Those letters set out quite clearly the concerns that the Limousine Association has in relation to the provisions of the bill as they apply to the limousine industry. Those documents are tabled with the full knowledge and consent of the president of the Limousine Association Queensland. Two issues are of concern to the Limousine Association. I will deal firstly with the requirement for electronic booking systems. The correspondence of 30 September and 3 October to the minister outlines the association’s concerns about both the consultation undertaken in relation to the development of the legislation, which I will come to, and also the impact of the legislation, particularly so far as it relates to the requirement for electronic records of prior bookings to be maintained. In that regard it is important to note that clause 29 of the bill inserts new sections 87B to 87G in the Transport Operations (Passenger Transport) Act—or TOPTA. New section 87B clearly provides in subsection (1) that the section applies to a limousine service other than a limousine service provided under a special purpose limousine service licence. So those are all the limousines that are available for bookings and for use that are not the special purpose limousines, such as those cars that are over 30 years old—the old chevvies and novelty cars—that are used for weddings, formals and special events. Other than those, all limousines are subject to new section 87B of the bill. 3254 Financial Administration and Audit and Another Act Amendment Bill 09 Oct 2007

Subsection (2) of new section 87B requires the operator of the limousine service—not the driver but the operator—to keep an electronic booking system that is in working condition in the limousine that is used to provide the service. Also in new subsection (2) the operator must make an electronic record containing the prescribed details—and those would presumably be prescribed by regulation—of the booking for the limousine service by using the electronic booking system. Also in new subsection (2) immediately before the limousine is used to provide the limousine service the operator must check that the electronic booking system displays the prescribed details of the booking for the limousine service. Subsection (3) of new section 87B refers to a driver. It provides that the driver, as opposed to the operator under the prior section, must not use a limousine to provide a service unless an electronic booking system in working condition is in the limousine, that the operator has made an electronic record containing the details of the booking and the booking system displays the prescribed details of the booking for the limousine service. Sitting suspended from 1 pm to 2.30 pm. Debate, on motion of Mr Nicholls, adjourned.

FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION AND AUDIT AND ANOTHER ACT AMENDMENT BILL

First Reading Hon. AP FRASER (Mount Coot-tha—ALP) (Treasurer) (2.30 pm): I present a bill for an act to amend the Financial Administration and Audit Act 1977 and the Government Owned Corporations Act 1993. I present the explanatory notes, and I move— That the bill be now read a first time. Motion agreed to. Second Reading Hon. AP FRASER (Mount Coot-tha—ALP) (Treasurer) (2.30 pm): I move— That the bill be now read a second time. The bill seeks to improve the timeliness of the preparation of annual financial statements of departments, statutory bodies and government owned corporations. Another objective is to improve the efficiency of processes under the Financial Administration and Audit Act. The proposed changes are as follows: the bill provides for the completion and audit of the financial statements for a financial year for departments, statutory bodies and government owned corporations no later than two months from the end of the financial year. In September 2006, the Australian Accounting Standards Board introduced a new standard AASB 1049 Financial Reporting of General Government Sectors by Governments. This new standard will require the state to prepare an additional set of audited financial statements for inclusion in the annual Report on State Finances. To ensure the timely completion of the additional financial statements the time frames for the completion of Queensland public sector agencies’ audited financial statements must be shortened by four weeks. The act currently requires departments and statutory bodies to have their financial statements completed and audited no later than three months from the end of the financial year. The Government Owned Corporations Act 1993 requires government owned corporations to prepare and provide their annual financial statements to the Auditor-General within two months after the end of each financial year. This bill provides that the audit of the statements, and audit report for the statements, is to be completed no later than two months after the end of each financial year. I move that the remainder of my speech be incorporated into Hansard. Leave granted. The Bill also provides the Treasurer with the authority to approve a department to enter into derivative transactions and removes the requirement to list a department in the Administration and Audit Regulation 1995 prior to it entering into such transactions. The Act currently provides that a department may only enter into a derivative transaction if it is both prescribed by regulation and has obtained the prior approval of the Treasurer to enter into the particular transaction or transactions of the type concerned. The requirement to draft subordinate legislation and seek the approval of Governor in Council leaves open the risk that a department may be prevented from implementing hedging strategies in a timely manner where it has not previously been listed by regulation. Furthermore, the current arrangements are inconsistent with the provisions regulating departments’ exercise of a range of other powers under the Act, including the powers to borrow, to invest or lend an amount and to form a company. The delegation of executive power, as proposed in the Bill, will align the provisions relating to derivative transactions with the approval arrangements for departments’ exercise of other powers under the Act, and acknowledges the central role of the Treasurer in managing financial risk of the State. 09 Oct 2007 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 3255

The Bill also provides the Treasurer with the authority to make investments with, or on deposit with, the Queensland Investment Corporation or the Queensland Treasury Corporation for investment in any fund of either of the corporations that the Treasurer thinks fit. The Act currently provides the Treasurer with the power to invest all or part of the net credit balance of the Treasurer’s Consolidated Fund Bank Account. It also outlines the investment vehicles available to the Treasurer, including any fund of QIC or QTC that has been approved by Governor in Council. With respect to funds invested with QIC under that subsection, the Treasurer presently determines the overall investment strategy for the investment of the funds (e.g. the proportion of funds allocated to asset classes such as equities, property, fixed interest etc). These moneys are invested through a series of funds dedicated to specific asset classes and investment management styles. From time to time, new funds are added and others abolished in line with changes in investment strategy, trust structures etc. Governor in Council approval is currently required to make these investments. Given the Treasurer’s role in managing the State’s finances it is considered appropriate for the Treasurer to be delegated the executive powers to invest or deposit monies with QIC or QTC. The approval of Governor in Council will still be required for any investments not undertaken either through QTC or QIC. Finally the Bill deletes the reference to certain closed funds in the Act. The Department of Natural Resources and Water and Treasury Department have requested that six funds be deleted from Schedule 2 (Continuing Funds) as they have now been formally ‘closed’ by the Treasurer under section 31 of the Act. The Departments have advised that the funds are no longer required and have no moneys standing to their credit. Mr Speaker, I commend the Bill to the House. Debate, on motion of Mr Nicholls, adjourned.

TRANSPORT LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL

Second Reading Resumed from p. 3254. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Moorhead): Order! Before calling the member for Clayfield, I acknowledge in the gallery today students and staff from All Souls and St Gabriel’s School in Charters Towers, represented in this place by the member for Charters Towers, Mr Shane Knuth. Mr NICHOLLS (Clayfield—Lib) (2.32 pm): I am delighted to be interrupted for that purpose. I welcome everyone from Charters Towers. Before we adjourned for lunch, I was referring to new section 87 in the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill and, in particular, the requirement under new section 87B(3) for a driver of a limousine to ensure that the limousine has an electronic booking system in working condition—that is, a driver cannot use the limo without that device being available—for the operator to have an electronic record containing the prescribed details and for the electronic booking system in the limousine to display the prescribed details. A failure to comply with either subsection 87B(2) or subsection 87B(3) can result in a maximum penalty of up to 80 penalty units or $6,000. In effect, this means that all operators of limousines must have an electronic booking device in the limousine and that device must be able to display details, which are yet to be described, of any booking made for that limousine service. It also requires an electronic record to be kept by the operator of the limousine service. It is interesting to note that, in reference to this particular clause on page 26, the explanatory notes states— It also requires a limousine driver to not use a limousine unless it is fitted with an electronic booking and recording system and a prior booking is displayed on the system. I emphasise the word ‘fitted’. It is quite clear that the intention of the drafter of the legislation, as explained in the explanatory notes, was that a limousine must be fitted with—that is, firmly attached to the vehicle itself—an electronic booking system. It has to be fitted with a system much as one would see in a taxi where the display is in the top right-hand corner of the dash and it tells the driver what is coming in. The driver can press a button and load in where they are going under their booking system. A number of very valid and serious concerns have been raised by limousine operators and the Limousine Association Queensland in relation to this requirement. Firstly, there is the question of justification. The justification put forward is this: limousines are touting for taxi work, which they are not permitted to do. The area of the cab rank where taxis wait to pick up a fare is reserved solely for taxis because they have much higher entry costs and ongoing operational costs in terms of radios, licence fees and those sorts of things. In his second reading speech the minister stated— Regular complaints about this unfair and illegal activity are received from the taxi industry which has much higher entry and operating costs. This behaviour also disadvantages limousine operators and drivers who only provide services with a prior booking, as per the legal requirement. 3256 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 09 Oct 2007

In the briefing from the officers of the department I sought some information about the number of complaints that had been investigated and proven. In those briefings the comment was made that the driving force behind the requirement for electronic devices on non-special purpose limousines has been the incidence of touting by limousine drivers for work that would normally be undertaken by taxis. In this respect, in its representations the limousine industry—as one would expect—indicates that this is not something that is so significant or prevalent that it would warrant this type of heavy-handed intervention in the operation of the limousine business. They do not deny that it does occur, but according to them the incidence of the occurrence does not warrant heavy-handed legislation which will make such a device mandatory. In dealing with the issue, and I raised this in the briefing yesterday, I ask the minister to provide details of the number of complaints received about limousines touting, the number of investigations that have been undertaken in relation to those complaints, as well as the number of successful prosecutions for breaches by limousine operators of the current rules. There are currently in place rules in relation to requirements for bookings to be made before a limousine can undertake a job. In effect, what we are talking about is implementing an evidentiary system, as determined by the department, requiring an electronic device. When such a requirement and an imposition is made on the limousine industry, it is important to test the assertion made in both the explanatory notes and the minister’s second reading speech that widespread touting is being undertaken by limousine drivers to the detriment of the taxi industry. It is only fair that we see the numbers involved with the assertion that is being used to justify this scheme, given that it is the primary reason for the requirement. This in turn raises the issue of the adequacy of the government in providing sufficient taxi licences in order to address the obvious transport needs of the travelling public. There is a particular problem at the Gold Coast where there is a limited number of taxis. My colleagues on this side of the House who represent seats on the Gold Coast report that the current operators have extreme difficulty in meeting the current demand, particularly on Friday and Saturday nights and at big event days when there is a significant influx of people. It is also interesting to note that almost 200 limousine drivers ply their trade at the Gold Coast, which has by far the greatest number of limousine licences issued to one region in the state. The Gold Coast has the highest number of limousines operating. We have to consider whether the number of limousines operating on the Gold Coast is, in fact, a reflection of unmet demand for passenger transport services. In effect, there are not enough taxis. If one looks at a comparison of the number of taxi licences issued for the Gold Coast and those issued for Brisbane, there is a very significant discrepancy. Most people who go to the coast and use a taxi find that there is a significant delay. My colleagues on this side will mention some of their experiences in that respect. Returning to the issue of the electronic booking device, on a number of occasions it has been stated to me in briefings and to members of the industry that a mobile phone could be an electronic booking system. I say quite clearly that a mobile phone would not seem to be adequate if one reads the explanatory notes, which state that section 87B requires a limousine driver to not use a limousine unless it is—and I emphasise the word—’fitted’ with an electronic booking and recording system. Quite clearly this rules out the use of a mobile phone, which by its very nature is not fitted to the vehicle. Most probably it is carried by the driver and used independently by that driver when not engaged in limousine services. It is their mobile phone and they use it for business and they may use it for other purposes, but it is certainly not a device that is ‘fitted’ to a vehicle. I have also asked for details of any electronic booking device that might be reasonably available at a reasonable cost to meet the requirements of proposed section 87B. To date I have not been provided with details of any system that can reasonably meet the requirements set out in the legislation. I am not aware of, or information has not been provided to me of, a readily available device to meet this requirement in the legislation. Such a device is not going to be the same device that the taxi booking systems use. Theirs is a much different system. They have GPS systems and they monitor the location of vehicles. They run a cab rank system so the first job up gets sent through, someone hits a button and says they will take that job. That is completely different from the type of booking system that a limousine uses which is usually by way of a phone call and a recording is made and so on. Clearly, proper consultation with the industry would have led to a cooperative resolution of these issues. The limousine industry has stated to me that it does not oppose the requirement for booking details to be maintained. It is supportive of the requirement and encourages the lawful conduct of business by operators and drivers in the limousine industry. But unfortunately there has not been sufficient consultation to address these particular issues. Again I emphasise that there has been a lack of consultation with the limousine association in a meaningful way that will address these issues. I have previously tabled letters from the association to both the Premier and the minister. It is important again to highlight some of the things that have occurred. 09 Oct 2007 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 3257

On 16 August 2006 a strategic planning meeting was held between officers of Queensland Transport and Limousine Association Queensland. The minutes of the meeting record that the president of the association agreed to look at an electronic booking system but that general service operators should have the system as well. So other people other than limousine operators who took people for journeys—say, people who operate airport transfers, shuttle buses, resort buses—should have a booking system in the interests of fairness because it is a cost of business and those people directly compete with the limousine industry in the provision of that service. There was some discussion about that. That matter is a separate issue from the one we are talking about here. Subsequent to that meeting on 16 August 2006, the president of the association went out and consulted with his members. He spoke to operators and determined that an electronic booking system was both impractical and unworkable. At a meeting with Queensland Transport in December 2006 the president advised Queensland Transport that there were difficulties with an electronic booking system and that it was unworkable for both financial and practical reasons. On 11 December 2006 the association received a letter from QT where reference was made about further consultation to implement the recommendations of the taxi and limousine industry strategic review. In that correspondence mention is made of a mandatory recording system but, importantly, no mention is made of an electronic system. It talks about the requirement for a recording system but no mention was made of the particular device or whether it had to be on paper or whatever it had to be. On 21 February 2007 another letter was received by the association from Queensland Transport calling for the establishment of a taxi and limousine industry development project implementation steering committee, a beloved acronym and a high-sounding name. That letter stated, ‘Input will be critical to implement the package in the tight time frame required.’ So QT writes to the association and says, ‘We need your input if we are going to get the package right in the tight time frame required.’ The letter suggested a meeting be held with the industry in the week commencing 19 March to discuss implementation—a meeting which was critical to the implementation of the package, as I mentioned. As at 30 September this year that meeting had still not taken place. In fact, we know that this legislation was introduced on 6 September 2007. So much for consultation. It is as a result of that that the problems that have been raised, and I am raising today, have occurred. There has been no practical consultation with the industry about its needs and to inform them about what was going on. These details are clearly set out in the letter of 30 September 2007 to the minister that I have tabled. I understand that on 2 October the limousine association had a meeting with officers of Queensland Transport where there was discussion of some of these issues and there was a subsequent meeting yesterday afternoon between the association and the parliamentary secretary to the minister in relation to these issues where yet again the issue of the electronic booking system was raised. The issue is that the legislation was introduced on 6 September without any prior consultation despite what I am informed is the prior promise of consultation and, in fact, the setting of a date for a meeting back in March 2007. If that consultation had taken place we may have had a different piece of legislation than we have here today and these issues in relation to the electronic booking system, which is the single biggest issue—the only issue, in fact, that has been raised with me—might have been resolved in a much more practical fashion which would have resolved a lot of these issues we are raising today and which would have substantially shortened what I am here talking about, which I am sure most people would have been pretty happy about. What this displays is a lack of practical consultation which has resulted in legislation that would be an unnecessary financial burden on the limousine industry and for which there has been no practical demonstrated application provided. This burden is being placed on the industry to address a problem for which no clear evidence has been provided—that is, that touting is of such a magnitude so as to cause substantial and significant harm to the limousine industry. It is the coalition’s view that the manner and implementation of these changes so far as they relate to the electronic booking system requirements and the requirement for a device to be fitted to a vehicle—I emphasise ‘fitted to a vehicle’—are a severe and unwarranted imposition on the small business operators in the limousine industry. The limousine industry is not made up of great big booking companies, it is not made up of people who own 20 or 30 limousines; it is made up of people who own between one and five in the main. They are small business operators who have the costs of business, increasing fuel costs and increasing regulation costs. They are prepared and acknowledge the need for a system to record bookings. What they are saying is, ‘An electronic booking system is impractical and unworkable,’ and ‘Can we talk about a system of recording that information that meets evidentiary requirements to make sure that we are not breaking the law, but also meets our requirements to make sure it is not an unwanted imposition on our business?’ The provisions of the legislation ignore significant practical operational requirements of the limousine industry. For example, a limousine may have a booking to collect a fare at the international airport terminal in Brisbane. However, due to this government’s mismanagement of its infrastructure plan, that limousine is substantially delayed in getting through the airport roundabout because of the traffic lights. 3258 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 09 Oct 2007

Mr Lucas: How much federal money went into the Gateway duplication? Not one cent. How dare you have the bald-faced cheek to come in here and say that. Mr NICHOLLS: The roundabout is clearly a state road. Mr Lucas: No, it is not. It is National Highway. You know it. Mr NICHOLLS: The East West Arterial, which runs from Sandgate Road across Nudgee Road through the airport roundabout out to the airport, is quite clearly a state government responsibility. Mr Lucas: National Highway, you know it. It just shows what a good transport minister you would be. You would want to hand over the responsibility of it. Mr NICHOLLS: It is quite clearly a state government responsibility and has been quite clearly ignored by this government for far too long in terms of coming up with a long-term solution that will meet the needs of the people of Brisbane. It will be forever a stain on the record of the former minister for transport and main roads, which would otherwise be quite good, that he has done nothing to improve that roundabout, which is not only of concern to limousine and taxi operators. One only needs to listen to the radio every afternoon to hear people ring in and complain about it. It is not only a problem for all of Brisbane but it is a significant concern for my own electorate of Clayfield. But I digress. A limousine operator, who is held up because they cannot get through the roundabout because this government cannot build a road, is delayed for half an hour in collecting a fare at the international airport terminal in Brisbane. As a result, he rings up one of his colleagues who he knows will be at the international terminal and who may be able to pick that passenger up and fulfil the booking, therefore ensuring that the passenger does not receive a second-rate service and gets to where he or she may be going in due course. The first booked operator contacts his or her colleague and arranges for that colleague to pick up the passenger. In those circumstances there would not be a prior booking and the operator would be unable to display that prior booking, it having been made with the first person who cannot make the original pick-up because of the delay and so there is no record of that. I am advised that this is typical of the type of knock-for-knock arrangement that operates in the limousine industry and, given the substantial traffic delays in and around the airport, that it occurs quite frequently. In fact, it is not unusual for there to be delays on a Friday afternoon of more than half an hour in traffic moving from the domestic terminal to the international terminal. This is just one of the practical difficulties that limousine drivers will have to deal with that this legislation does not take into account: this type of knock-for-knock arrangement where one person cannot make it for whatever reason—and at the airport it is because of the roundabout—and they make an arrangement with another driver to pick up that fare for them and move them through. It is also important to note that the limousine industry itself has a number of complaints in relation to the unlicensed or unauthorised operation of a number of vehicles which have been made to the department of transport and which appear to them to have not been fully investigated. This includes the operation of Hummer vehicles and Ford stretch Territories as limousines which it is alleged do not have appropriate licences for their businesses and which have been reported. There is also the issue of forward control vehicles such as Taragos and VW vans, which are operating without appropriate limousine or taxi licences, in relation to providing services as well as accommodation tourist transfer operators providing services contrary to legislation. Obviously, there is healthy competition between various passenger transport providers and each side has its own particular point of view. It is, however, the case that it is the perception of the limousine association that— There has been a lack of practical understanding of the limousine operation and the legislative requirements that are imposed on small business operators. Consequently the added impost put forward in this draconian and discriminatory document is abhorrent and has been instigated in a manner that is not transparent and is not applied equally across the public transport industry. The coalition would support very strongly amendments to this legislation which would remove the requirement for an electronic booking system to be fitted to a limousine but which would still require a properly maintained paper system in the vehicle which would much more easily suit the requirements of the industry yet still meet the evidentiary requirements of the legislation. I turn to the taxi industry. The legislation also tries to deal with the problems of providing sufficient taxis during peak demand times. Firstly, I would like to acknowledge the tremendous service that taxis provide in our public transport system. It is often not recognised by the broader public that taxis are a vital component of the public transport network. Indeed, most passenger trips on Friday and Saturday evenings and at big events are undertaken in taxis provided by private operator and private booking companies. I want to reiterate the coalition’s commitment to a well-regulated taxi industry, recognising the benefits that proper regulations provide in terms of accessibility, security and maintenance of standards as well as provision of services at other times when it might otherwise be uneconomical to provide those services. The coalition also recognises the job that taxidrivers do in assisting those in our community who for a variety of reasons, whether because of disability, injury, age or other infirmity, cannot use our public transport network. This legislation proposes to require taxi booking companies—for example, Yellow Cabs or Black and White Cabs—to develop peak demand management plans. It is interesting to note 09 Oct 2007 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 3259 that this is an acknowledgement of the government’s failure to provide a framework to enable the taxi industry to meet increased demand on Friday and Saturday nights and when large special events occur. This is despite the former minister’s repeated claims that taxi targets in terms of response times were being met and that there was no trouble with people being left behind at queues and not meeting industry standards. Obviously this legislation puts those claims into clear perspective and highlights them for the spin they were at the time. One does not have to go very far at any stage in recent times to find live examples of people waiting hours at ranks for taxis on busy nights. This amendment is a much delayed response and again is typically bureaucratic and heavy handed. It requires a plan to be formulated and submitted to QT. If a booking company fails to do so, it is subject to a penalty of 40 penalty units or $3,000. It assumes that the taxi industry does not already know where the problems are and cannot suggest its own solutions. This is not the case, as the taxi industry is, and has been, innovative and forward thinking in relation to the myriad problems facing the taxi industry and passenger transport issues generally. It is important to note that the introduction of NightLink taxis was initially an initiative of the taxi industry and the Brisbane City Council which was subsequently picked up and adopted by Queensland Transport to provided additional services late at night in the Brisbane CBD. The provision for a capacity for peak demand taxis is welcome. However, I would urge the government to not stop with this amendment but to consider alternative suggestions put forward by the taxi industry to make full use of vehicles that would not otherwise be running during peak demand times and to provide services as and when they are needed. I would also take the opportunity to raise the very real concerns the industry has in relation to the forthcoming deadline regarding accessibility requirements for the taxi industry. This is something that the taxi industry has been grappling with, and I want to commend in particular the Taxi Council and its chief executive officer, Mr Blair Davies, for the work they are doing to disseminate information about the obligations of operators, booking companies and drivers in relation to the provision of accessible services from, I think, 1 December this year. There are, however, some very real problems that this legislation fails to take the opportunity to address in relation to those issues. For example, it is often difficult for taxi booking companies, despite the requirements of legislation, to control drivers once they leave the depot. This is a problem in terms of providing services to people who might require wheelchair accessible taxis. Drivers can, and it is perfectly legal to, switch off their tracking devices, thus negating control that the booking company may have over the dispatch of wheelchair accessible vehicles to those people requiring those services. At other times it is often difficult to ask a driver to forgo a hail fare or a much closer fare to drive a considerable distance for no reward—in terms of being paid to cover that considerable distance—to collect a passenger requiring a wheelchair accessible vehicle and not to receive recompense for doing so. In addition, drivers lose income during that period that they are assisting people to enter and exit wheelchair accessible taxis. Although legislation allows for the taxidriver to charge for the time spent assisting people to get in and out of their taxis, most drivers do not do so, believing that it would be an unwanted further imposition on people already facing hardship. There are solutions to this dilemma which have been proposed by the taxi industry and which an innovative and perceptive government would consider and take up with a view to enhancing the availability of wheelchair accessible taxis to meet the Australian disability standards requirements. I would again urge the minister to review this area of the taxi industry with a view to bringing amendments to the House to address this issue, which is of major concern. I know in discussions that I had with many members of the taxi industry at their recent annual conference that this was by far and away the most significant issue they faced and it was concerning them. To date the response of the government has been lukewarm at best and it is an area where a further and substantial improvement could be made through proper consultation and a willingness to consider solutions proposed by the taxi industry. This legislation would have been an ideal opportunity to address those concerns. I also want to draw attention to clause 17 of the bill which amends section 45 to increase by a magnitude of 10 the penalty imposed on contract holders who breach their contract requirements. This means that a maximum penalty can be now $3,000 for a breach of contract—that is, contracts entered into after this legislation, not existing contracts. On page 12 of the explanatory notes the justification is that the bill will place a greater emphasis on QT contract holders to meet their contract obligations. The question that will now need to be asked, given the restructure announced this morning by the Premier and the minister, is whether these obligations are going to still apply between the new south-east Queensland transit authority—whatever form that might take—and the contract providers. Is that where those obligations are going to be provided for in the generation four contracts that are going to be up for negotiation? The other question that needs to be asked is whether these obligations are going to apply to Queensland Rail in its Citytrain and Traveltrain operations which will presumably be operating under contract to the new transit authority. We know, for example, that Citytrain service cancellations are an increasing feature of the way this government handles passenger demand. By simply not providing a 3260 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 09 Oct 2007 train service, they push passengers onto a bus service which in Brisbane is much more efficiently run than the rail network and in Brisbane carries many more passengers than the entire south-east Queensland Citytrain network. A total of 590 cancellations in the month of July alone shows how poorly the government has managed to plan for public transport infrastructure growth. It will be important to ensure that, should the need for enforcement action occur, those subject to the review are not just the taxi industry or the limousine industry but also other service providers such as Queensland Rail, Citytrain and Traveltrain. That is, the penalties provided for in this legislation should apply to all contract providers, whether it is Brisbane Transport, Sunbus, Yellow Cabs, or Citytrain and Traveltrain. There are a number of very significant concerns in relation to those areas that I would urge the minister to further review and perhaps further amendments could be introduced to address those concerns that I have highlighted here today. The second major area of change in relation to this legislation is the changes made to the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act. These changes reflect the National Transport Commission’s compliance and enforcement model legislation—or model bill, as it is called. In his second reading speech the then minister referred to the amendments. He also referred to crash statistics in Queensland and the impact of heavy vehicles in relation to those crash statistics. In his second reading speech the minister referred to the potential hazard heavy vehicles can pose when not managed properly. In 2006 heavy vehicles including rigid trucks, articulated trucks, road trains and B-doubles were involved in 53 fatal crashes, resulting in 54 fatalities. This represents 16 per cent of the Queensland road toll and is six fatalities or 12½ per cent higher than 2005 and 13 per cent higher than the previous five-year average. It is certainly the case that crash statistics in Queensland need to be closely observed. In fact, under this Labor government the road toll has increased over the last couple of years to the extent that this year if the rate of road fatalities continues we will have the highest number of road fatalities in over a decade. As at 30 September 2007 the road toll was 281. That is some 40 more than the road toll at the same time last year. This is a trend that is alarming and is continuing and is seemingly incapable of being solved by this Labor government. Despite spending $5 million a year on television advertising, this government has no measure of the effectiveness of that advertising. While some of this may be explained by population growth, it is of course the case that while our population has increased by two per cent, the number of road fatalities has increased by 17 per cent. As I have said on a number of occasions, the state government needs to get serious about road safety activities. It needs to do more than revise targets downwards and send out spin. It needs to adopt recommendations to build safer roads and consider adopting models that acknowledge that accidents occur and develop road networks that minimise the chance of a fatality when that accident occurs. There are numerous examples that I have highlighted in the past that relate to the benefits of such a system, particularly examples from Europe and Scandinavia. It is also important to note that the national road safety strategy endorsed by this government states that the focus of road safety efforts should be on building and maintaining safe roads, which is twice as effective as addressing road user behaviour or improving the safety of vehicles. This government should be addressing these issues rather than engaging in self-promotion and spin using glossy advertising campaigns for which it has no measure of effectiveness. In relation to the amendments currently being considered to the legislation, it is again interesting to note the tardiness with which this government has acted notwithstanding the then minister’s own recognition of the hazard that heavy vehicles can pose when not managed properly. Despite the increase in fatal crashes identified over the past six years and the fact that in 2006 heavy vehicle fatalities were 12½ per cent higher than in 2005 and 13 per cent higher than the previous five-year average, this government delays and cannot get its legislation in relation to heavy vehicles into this House in a timely fashion. It is instructive to note that the discussion paper to implement the national compliance and enforcement reforms in Queensland about which we are talking today was issued on 18 July 2005. That is two years after an initial discussion bill was put forward by the National Transport Commission. That original national model bill was proposed in November 2003. The discussion paper distributed by this government in 2005 put out the draft document and required a response within one month. It is also instructive to note the timing proposed in that discussion paper which called for the introduction of legislation by this government in early July 2006. That is according to paragraph 11 of the discussion paper. Here we are in October 2007, 14 months later, only just discussing the implementation of this momentous legislation in the face of what the then transport minister himself outlined as the dangers of the increasing road toll. This is again another sign of this government’s bureaucratic incompetence in bringing legislation to the House in a speedy manner. The coalition will be supporting the legislation as it implements the nationally agreed scheme in relation to compliance and enforcement activities of heavy vehicles. I want to put it clearly on the record that the coalition has been assured in briefings that the current 7½ per cent load tolerance for grain on heavy vehicles will be used as the basis for considering any overload breaches and that the volumetric standard for carrying livestock will continue to be implemented and that this legislation does not impact 09 Oct 2007 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 3261 on either of those two schemes. That reassurance from the officers is welcome and it is very much part of the support the coalition gives in relation to this legislation. That 7½ per cent mass tolerance and the maintenance of the volumetric loading requirements for livestock are very much part of it. The coalition strongly supports the introduction of the chain of responsibility components, including the clarification of those parties who can be considered liable under the broad provisions of the chain of responsibility legislation which to date has not been as widely defined as it ought to in terms of bringing people involved in the supply chain before the courts. I think it is important that in doing this the government gives a very clear commitment to the trucking industry, both operators and drivers, that it will not just be the operators and drivers who will be the subject of enforcement and compliance activities. It will be important to set examples in relation to chain of responsibility where it can be shown and proven that consignors, consignees, loaders or others in the chain of responsibility have breached their obligation. The member for Gregory raised the issue earlier on this afternoon in relation to some of the fines that have been imposed. It has been reported to me that in New South Wales, which introduced this legislation over 12 months ago, there have been $13 million in fines collected under the chain of responsibility legislation, including actions against consignors and consignees. It is important that all those involved in any breaches of the requirements are held to account and that the operators and drivers who have been at the forefront of substantial reforms for a substantial period of time are not the only ones subject to the compliance and enforcement activities. It was interesting to note, again in talking to someone involved in the trucking industry earlier today, that recently in New South Wales over a 72-hour period RTA inspectors weighed about 6,000 vehicles of which 5,500 were found to be overweight. So there is a significant issue in relation to this. That is why we support this legislation. It is important that the chain of responsibility issues be tested fully and it is not just the drivers and operators who are held responsible. There are many provisions of the legislation which do contravene the fundamental legislative principles. Indeed, in this place we see so many pieces of legislation that contravene fundamental legislative principles that one wonders why the government even bothers with them. It is a bit like its attitude to FOI applications. The attitude is often at best lip-service. If this were not the case, why do the explanatory notes spend 6½ pages explaining why possible breaches of the fundamental legislative principles should be accepted? I do note that safeguards have been put in place in relation to powers to enter places of business for the purpose of gathering evidence as well as prohibition on entering places that are used primarily for residences where that may occur without warrant or reasonable excuse. Nevertheless, it is concerning that there is an increased use of the coercive powers of the state and this is particularly so in cases where people may not have the means to resist or the knowledge either in a corporate or a legal sense as to their own rights and responsibilities. They may not have the means to be able to get that information, either through engaging lawyers or industry advocates. Owner operators are often so busy earning a quid that they have little or no time to be able to brush up on the finer points of legal etiquette in relation to investigation of complaints. These amendments provide a nationally consistent framework for improved compliance with and enforcement of road transport regulations and the implementation of a national framework is supported. We commend the government for bringing this to the House, even if it is somewhat late. The implementation of provisions allowing cross-border compliance and enforcement is also to be commended, and the coalition supports those changes. The legislation also makes some minor amendments as detailed in the explanatory notes in relation to commencing actions for hit-and-run offences. Although the bill currently before the House proposes extending the time period for commencing proceedings from the current maximum of two years to three years, I understand that the minister will be introducing an amendment to extend that to five years. I can advise the minister that the coalition will be supporting that extension of time. We just ask if there will be an explanation for why the difference between three years and five years has been introduced. In relation to infrastructure, the bill also implements some necessary changes in order to enable the procurement of land to enable transport infrastructure and public-private partnerships to proceed. In particular, I note this amendment is required to support the activities of the state government owned company City North Infrastructure Pty Ltd, which is currently procuring the development of the Airport Link and the northern section of the northern busway as a PPP. In passing, I acknowledge that this project had its genesis as part of the Liberal Party in the lead-up to that outstanding 2004 council campaign that saw the election of Campbell Newman and has been pushed through with great aplomb by Campbell and his council team. It is supported, I acknowledge, by this government which has taken the running and is now managing the Airport Link through the electorates of the member for Stafford, the former member for Brisbane Central and my electorate. There are other issues in relation to Airport Link which are being worked through. However, this amendment is clearly necessary if that project is to proceed, and it is supported. In relation to that, I would like to mention some restrictions that seem somewhat ridiculous. They relate to land acquired for hardship purposes. I have a situation in my own electorate where the department has acquired land on a hardship basis for Airport Link. That is, it has not necessarily been 3262 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 09 Oct 2007 acquired for the tunnel. A resident has had concerns and the department has made a decision to buy that resident’s property off them. There is, in fact, a neighbour across the road who would love to buy that property off the department for the same price that the department paid. They have made an offer to do so but they have been told that it cannot be sold back until after the project is finished. There is a willing buyer who would like to buy that block of land for the same price as the department paid of it, which it acquired on a hardship basis. The original owner would dearly love to do that. He has actually got a buyer for his property. So there are two people fully aware of Airport Link who want to buy land sitting right over the top or in close proximity to it at full market price. He has been told that, for some reason, the sale cannot go through. I will be writing to the minister separately about it. It seems to me that there is a win-win situation there. If it can go ahead, it ought to be able to do so. If there is a restriction on selling it, it might be appropriate to bring in some changes to allow the flexibility for that to occur. That is something that might come out of this legislation. Other amendments are made in relation to validating certain actions taken by prior governments. I mentioned those in relation to the acquisition of lands for the busway where obviously there has been some form of bureaucratic bungling and the chief executive of the wrong department has made those acquisitions. In summary, I reiterate the coalition’s support for the broad thrust of the bill. I think it is somewhat lamentable that so many pieces of legislation have been rolled into one, not allowing a full debate on some issues which would be worthy of quite substantial contribution by all members of the House, particularly in relation to the taxi and limousine industry. I know that that is a contentious part of this legislation. It would have been good to separate that out and to have perhaps had a separate debate about that—including a debate on the balance of the package of reforms approved in November last year. I would again urge the minister to reconsider the requirement for electronic booking system devices to be fitted to all non-special purpose limousines as this is by all accounts unnecessary and impractical and is the major bone of contention for that industry. Proper consultation with the limousine industry would, I am sure, have delivered a much better outcome than that currently being proposed by the legislation. The opposition supports the implementation of the changes to give effect to the national scheme for road transport reform compliance and enforcement, although again we do have reservations about the number of breaches of the fundamental legislative principles. I also understand that there will be some discussion in relation to the Intelligent Access Program that will come through in the amendments moved in the consideration in detail stage. I will discuss some of those issues when they are brought up by the minister. Mr STEVENS (Robina—Lib) (3.10 pm): I rise to speak in the debate on the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 2007 and join with my coalition colleagues in supporting the fundamental directions in this bill in reforming specific areas of the transport industry in Queensland. The transport industry in Queensland, in particular road and rail transport, is expected to double within the next 20 years. This will add billions of dollars in direct and indirect funding to our Queensland economy. A vision statement from the government states—

The transport system is a complex and inter-linked system of transport infrastructure and services. It is created and operated by the actions of all levels of government and private providers. A well-functioning transport system contributes to the quality of life of all Queenslanders. It helps create a strong economic environment leading to increased employment, safer and more supportive communities as well as supporting ecologically sustainable development. That statement is entirely correct. But without proper planning of transport infrastructure the government has failed to deliver the much-needed services that the people of Queensland deserve. The Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 2007 amends the following six pieces of transport legislation: the Maritime and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2006, the Transport Infrastructure Act 1994, the Transport Operations (Marine Pollution) Act 1995, the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995, the Transport Planning and Coordination Act 1994 and the Transport Operations (Passenger Transport) Act 1994. Reform of the transport industry is sorely needed. This bill, which amends those six pieces of legislation, focuses on two significant areas of amendments. The first is compliance with national standards and enforcement reforms for heavy vehicles. The second is to improve the taxi and limousine industry to enhance the range of services available throughout Queensland. The reform of the taxi and limousine industry is a result of the national competition policy review of the Transport Operations (Passenger Transport) Act 1994. This will be my focus in my speech today. The bill also adopts the provisions provided by the National Road Transport Reform (Compliance and Enforcement) Bill 2003 which was developed by the National Transport Commission to improve conformity and enforcement of heavy vehicle operating requirements. 09 Oct 2007 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 3263

A major focus of this area is the chain of responsibility laws which ensure that all parties who breach the road transport laws are made accountable. By complying with this national bill it will bring into line in Queensland enforcement powers for authorised officers to aid with the prosecution of offences. For example, it will extend the period in which proceedings can be commenced for the prosecution of a person involved in a road incident who fails to comply with their statutory duties and liabilities. I now move on to the focus of my speech which is the amendments to the Transport Operations (Passenger Transport) Act 1994. The Transport Operations (Passenger Transport) Act 1994 will be amended to require all taxi service contract holders to develop and submit for Queensland Transport approval an annual peak demand management plan. This peak demand management plan would especially look at peak periods such as Friday and Saturday nights and large events where there is a tenfold increase in demand. This also requires taxi contract holders to introduce an annual peak demand management plan. The amendments will increase penalties for failing to meet requirements of the service contract. The penalty will be increased from four penalty units, which is $300 and has been disregarded in many instances, to 40 penalty units, which is $3,000. This will be much harder for people to ignore. There had to be a significant increase as the lesser penalty had not been a deterrent in the past. The amendments will introduce special purpose limousine licences for weddings, school formals and tourist services. This broadens the type of car that can be utilised as a limousine. Vehicles operating under a special purpose limousine licence must be at least 30 years old, which probably covers mine, and will be required to display a distinctive numberplate. The amendments will also require limousine operators to use a passenger booking and recording system. This system will deter rogue limousine operators from cruising the streets for impromptu work which has been the basis of many complaints from the taxi industry, and rightly so. It has occurred to me at the Gold Coast Convention Centre. I understand the taxi industry’s complaints in this regard. The recording system must be electronic. The amendments will introduce peak demand taxi permits to increase the number of taxis during peak times such as Friday and Saturday nights and for major events. For me this is the most important part of the legislation from a Gold Coast perspective. I would now like to make comment in relation to the amendments to the taxi and limousine industry. I would like to put on record that I do support the amendments that are being made. However, my point of interest is in relation to the capacity for part-time usage of these taxi services. The Gold Coast is desperately short of an adequate number of taxis on the road, particularly over the weekend period. The ratio of 434 cabs to serve half a million people plus four million tourists annually, which is 100,000 tourists on the Gold Coast on any one day, is not adequate for the Gold Coast population. I was with a cab driver in Sydney the other day and he told me that there are over 6,000 cabs in Sydney serving a population of four million people. On an equivalent division, allowing for similar tourism—although the Gold Coast probably has higher tourism numbers on a per capita basis—that would mean that the Gold Coast deserves 800 taxi licences. Ask any Gold Coast person and they will tell you that on any busy day it is impossible to get a cab and it requires at least an hour-long wait. This is not acceptable for the residents or tourists of the Gold Coast—Australia’s premier tourism destination. Mr Pitt interjected. Mr STEVENS: With due respect to its secondary location of Cairns. The root of the problem with the taxi service on the Gold Coast is the extraordinary cost to buy a licence on the Gold Coast. It is now in the vicinity of $580,000. Obviously, it is not the average mum and dad driving around when it involves those sorts of dollars. There are multiple owners of cabs in the Gold Coast area. They look at it as a very secure investment. In other words, they are looking for a major return, probably in the vicinity of eight per cent on their $580,000 investment after their wages are paid through the contract system they have with their drivers. Understandably, from an investor’s point of view, to maintain a return on that $580,000 investment there is a necessity to limit the number of taxis available. But unfortunately, by limiting those numbers on the Gold Coast, the people—the public—of the Gold Coast and tourists to the Gold Coast suffer an inferior service that is provided. This cannot continue. My proactive and helpful suggestion for the taxi industry on the Gold Coast is to incorporate the ‘weekend warriors’—clearly identified cabs licensed from five o’clock Friday afternoon until midnight Sunday night coloured, as Jeff Kennett once did in Melbourne, in a bright colour, perhaps a nice bright purple, that might be called the ‘purple people movers’. These cabs would operate on a part-time basis as well for major events such as the Indy, the Magic Millions and the many sporting events and festivals that are part of the Gold Coast’s famed tourism industry. The purple cabs could have perhaps a limited licence plate cost—say, in the vicinity of $20,000— which would be principally designated to accommodate the owner-driver class of investor who would come in on a part-time basis from Friday to Sunday to make that a reality. A taxi service is supposed to be a demand-responsive passenger service and we need to match the service to the demand, but that is presently not happening on the Gold Coast and, to some lesser extent, in Brisbane. With the 3264 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 09 Oct 2007 government’s major drive into good behaviour in relation to drink driving—it is spending an enormous amount of expenditure educating the public on safe road practices—it is encouraging people to take public transport where possible and not to drink and drive. Yet there are tens of thousands of people out on Friday and Saturday nights on the Gold Coast drinking and needing a public transport vehicle—and I see taxis as a public transport vehicle—to get them home from these entertainment precincts. It is our responsibility to make sure those capacities are provided. And I am sure that the transport minister would agree with me that if you catch a bus on a Friday or Saturday night on the Gold Coast you might be waiting for a long time before you manage to get home. Mr Nicholls: The 8 am Monday special! Mr STEVENS: Yes, the 8 am Monday special. I thank the member for Clayfield. I understand the need to protect drivers’ jobs in the taxi industry on the Gold Coast, and I am very supportive of that. They work very long and hard. They work 12-hour shifts. They are engaged for a long time sitting on taxi ranks and for very limited remuneration for the hours that they serve. I am amazed that the Labor government with its strong union backing does not insist on union-oriented drivers or something along those lines to ensure that in some cases they earn more than the $5 an hour they get sitting around when there are not any passengers. Government members interjected. Mr STEVENS: No, they are contracted drivers, for those members who are uninformed in this matter. What we have here is a responsibility of the government and importantly the taxi industry itself to understand and admit that there is a lack of service to Gold Coast patrons. If the taxi industry does not address that lack of service to Gold Coast patrons, it is incumbent upon governments to legislate to make it happen. It is a highly protected industry in terms of limited plate designations. There are other protected industries like newsagents and chemist shops, but no-one complains about the lack of newsagents and no-one complains about the lack of chemist shops—you can get every script you want filled around the place—but they do complain long and loud about the lack of taxi services, particularly on busy occasions such as Friday and Saturday nights. In conclusion, the city of the Gold Coast deserves a better taxi system with services matching the demand, and this can only be achieved with fundamental changes. We welcome these changes through the transport legislation that may facilitate a better service coming to the Gold Coast, and legislation which also addresses the issues of the heavy transport industry and passenger services across Queensland in general. The people of Queensland deserve an improved legislative regulation of the industry to provide better services in both areas of transportation. The particular concerns that I have highlighted reinforce the overwhelming public perception on the Gold Coast that our taxi service is inadequate and underachieving. I strongly urge the Gold Coast taxi industry to take on board my comments in a positive manner to self-improve services it provides to Gold Coast residents. It is a sad day when governments are forced to regulate the private industry sector to provide a better service to the general public. Unfortunately, the high level of protectionism given to the taxi industry because of the inordinate investment required to participate in the industry has resulted in an unsatisfactory service situation. I would like to think that the taxi industry itself will take this opportunity to address the general public perception of its limited services through the provisions available in this new legislation. I commend the bill to the House and look forward to catching a taxi on the weekends on the Gold Coast in a very short time frame in the very near future. Ms LEE LONG (Tablelands—ONP) (3.25 pm): I rise to contribute to the debate on the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 2007. This bill addresses two major areas—the adoption of national compliance and enforcement reforms affecting heavy vehicles and improvements to the taxi and limousine industries. There are also a number of amendments dealing with relatively minor matters to do with infrastructure issues and some clarification of legislation. The introduction of provisions from the national Road Transport Reform (Compliance and Enforcement) Bill 2003 is presented as following the guide of what is called a model bill. This national bill is also described as being designed to achieve national uniformity. Certainly, when we are talking about an industry that operates extensively across state borders, this makes sense. However, the state bill before us today does not move towards national uniformity. The explanatory notes say that only those provisions that strengthen current heavy vehicle compliance and enforcement provisions are adopted. So we will still have Queensland only rules and regulations which will mean less national efficiency, less national conformity and more complicated compliance issues than could have been the case. The explanatory notes describe this adoption as leading to positive changes to on-road behaviour by those involved in the heavy vehicle transport industry. This is apparently to be achieved by making sure everyone who influences this on-road behaviour could all be held accountable under what is termed ‘chain of responsibility’ laws. The explanatory notes state— If a person in control of a heavy vehicle is proved to have committed an offence, an influencing person is taken to have committed the offence ... Therefore, it is up to that influencing person to prove that they are innocent by proving that they have taken what are called ‘reasonable steps’ or by proving they had no influence in the offence committed. I believe the frequent reversals of onus of proof are hallmarks of the ALP government in 09 Oct 2007 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 3265

Queensland, but in this case it is particularly fraught with danger. For example, if a heavy vehicle driver is involved in a fatal accident and is later convicted of dangerous driving causing death, then people like consignors, packers, loaders and receivers could all be considered guilty of the same offence. The explanatory notes also state— The aim of chain of responsibility laws is to ensure that all parties who influence on-road behaviour are held accountable for breaches of road transport laws. Under this concept, legal liability can reach beyond the driver to other parties both within and outside the road transport industry so that the real causes of non-compliance with road transport laws are targeted. I understand the concept of chain of responsibility, but I am strongly opposed to reversing the onus of proof at any time, let alone when it might involve such serious charges. Society has a responsibility, and this parliament has a responsibility, to fundamental legislative principles. The reason given for this reversal of the onus of proof is that it may be difficult for the prosecution to prove that someone exercised that influence. In that case, why does the government think that it would be any easier for a defendant to prove their innocence? There is gobbledegook about how a defendant would have peculiar—not particular but peculiar—knowledge of the information necessary to prove their innocence. Surely everyone should be innocent until proven guilty and surely it is up to the investigators, who have the advantage of getting vastly increased powers under this bill, and the prosecutors to build their case. If someone has influenced a driver into committing an offence, then that person should be held accountable. But they should be held accountable under the protection of fundamental legislative principles, not put at risk because it is just all too hard for the investigators who have all the powers necessary to investigate. I believe it is well understood that our truck drivers and operators are happy to operate under reasonable schedules and with an opportunity to get a reasonable return for their effort. But I recognise that there may be some in the industry who may insist on drivers and operators running too heavy, running too fast or running into the fatigue zone to meet deadlines in a very competitive industry. If deadlines are not met, there could be employment risks or the loss of contracts held over their heads. The explanatory notes give examples of the kinds of people who may be affected by this chain of responsibility. They include consignors, packers, loaders, receivers and operators. I believe it is the major retailers who insist on tight delivery schedules and ridiculously tight margins and who have used the size of their contracts to nail operators to the floor. The chain of responsibility needs to extend deep into corporate boardrooms around the country before it will really make much difference on our roads. I turn now to the provisions that affect the taxi and limousine industries. Three areas are dealt with. They relate to periods of peak demand for taxis, ensure that limousine operators are not poaching cab passengers and allow for special kinds of limousine services in specific circumstances. Under this bill taxi contract holders will have to make annual plans, spelling out how they will cope with peak demand times, such as State of Origin games, the Magic Millions, the Cairns Amateurs and so on. To help, there will be a new kind of taxi permit introduced called a peak demand taxi permit, which will put extra vehicles on the roads at those times. Taxi services on the tablelands are generally very responsive. They know well their local community and their customers’ needs. The amendments in this bill will force the limousine industry to operate booking systems so that it can demonstrate that it is operating in accordance with the requirements of its service agreements. Other amendments allow for special vehicles, such as vintage cars, to be used for events such as weddings, school formals and tourist services. There is much in this bill that appears reasonable. However, there is also much in this bill that I find very unacceptable. The explanatory notes discuss the fundamental legislative principles that are challenged by this bill for some seven pages. There is discussion about the increasing amount of heavy transport on our roads, but there is no discussion about the constantly reducing level of rail services, which is a direct result of this government’s policy direction. There is much discussion about chain of responsibility. There are vastly expanded powers for inspectors, but a shifting of the onus of proof to a large number of people, most or all of whom may well be innocent. There is discussion about heavy transport being overrepresented in crashes causing fatalities, but there is no mention of whether heavy transport is under or overrepresented in accidents of all kinds and no discussion of Australian Design Rules or any other method of making accidents involving heavy transport less dangerous. There is no discussion anywhere about the vastly inadequate road environment that this government and the federal government have provided. There is a duty of care for them to provide a safe and adequate road network. I have spoken before about the lack of rest areas, inadequate facilities and the fact that this government itself is imposing more and more demands on an overstressed industry. The government is as much part of the chain of responsibility as any dispatcher, wholesaler or buyer. It needs to do some real work and to spend some real money on addressing these issues rather than shifting the burden of proof onto average, decent, working Queenslanders. Mr CHOI (Capalaba—ALP) (3.34 pm): I rise to speak in support of the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill. Although this bill introduces a number of what I regard as important initiatives, I shall address specifically those amendments that essentially reform Queensland’s taxi industry. As all members know, the taxi industry is one of the mainstays of public transport in this state. Every day it 3266 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 09 Oct 2007 provides essential services to people in cities and towns in every region. Like many other industries in Queensland, the taxi industry is struggling to keep pace with the tremendous growth that is occurring in the state, particularly in the south-east corner. As more and more people come to our state, greater demands are placed on a range of service related industries. The amendments contained in this bill are an important part of the response from both the industry and the government to the challenges posed by this increased demand. These amendments will enable the taxi industry to better respond to demand from passengers at critical times. No-one likes people who jump queues, whether they are standing in a queue in a bank during their lunch hour or they are waiting for a taxi at three in the morning. But one of the essential differences between those two scenarios—and one of which this government is very conscious—is the effect that alcohol may have on some people’s demeanour at three in the morning. The frustration that is created by unruly patrons competing for advantage at the rank can begin with verbal abuse and can perhaps lead to violence. Unfortunately, in recent times vision recorded by security cameras has meant that we have seen tragedies unfold before our eyes. This violence severely jeopardises and undermines the reputation of the taxi industry and increases the risk of danger to members of the public. This government is committed to the safety of the travelling public. I am sure that members will be aware of the success of one of this government’s other major initiatives, which is secure taxi ranks, which have been operating for some time now with marshals and security guards managing order and safety. Since their introduction, secure taxi ranks have continued to be strongly supported by taxi patrons and the taxi industry. I take this opportunity to thank the Taxi Council, the drivers of taxis and the travelling public for their support of this initiative. Secure taxi ranks work only because everyone wants them to work and they contribute to their success. The amendments contained in this bill introduce peak demand management plans for taxi companies. Peak demand taxis will complement and support the secure taxi ranks. Through the development of peak demand management plans, booking companies can better structure their operations to cater for dynamic changes to meet new market trends and the evolving demands in Queensland. We all know that Queensland is a marvellous state that has many and varied sporting and social events, including the Indy, the Ekka and regional and rural shows, and the State of Origin to name just a few. Along with the excellent public transport options offered these days under TransLink, taxi services are an essential part of meeting demand at these times. The availability of a sufficient number of taxis to get people home quickly from such events can reduce the risk of incidents and enhance the feeling of safety for both patrons and taxidrivers. However, if the government issued additional licences so that there was a sufficient number of taxis to cater for peak demand, we would end up with far too many taxis during off-peak times. Sometimes I feel really sorry for those taxidrivers who sit at taxi ranks for hours on end just to get a passenger who wants to go to a place that is about three or four kilometres away. It is no benefit to anyone, including the public, if taxi owners and drivers do not get a reasonable return on their investment or their labour. These amendments allow taxi booking companies to deliver extra taxis into the system at peak times without incurring the cost of having to get additional licences. I regard these amendments as a win for the industry and a win for passengers. It means that more taxis will be on the road during peak times when the demand is there. But it also ensures that these additional taxis will not compete for business at times when the level of demand is normal and when those additional vehicles would otherwise diminish the return on the investment of those taxi operators who paid for those extra licences. To access peak demand permits, taxi booking companies will be required to develop a peak demand management plan. This plan will provide critical details as to how peak demand taxis will be managed to meet minimum service levels. The peak demand management plan also provides for the taxi booking company to nominate the number of extra taxis it believes are necessary to manage demand in peak periods. All taxi booking contract holders throughout Queensland will be required to submit peak demand management plans. Key factors to be considered in the plans would include the number of peak demand taxis needed and shifts per vehicle, and details such as the times and dates of the demand. Strategies for managing demand for taxi services during peak patronage periods will look at the actions and responsibilities for achieving the plan’s objectives; how contractors will inform operators, drivers and the community of peak demand strategies; and how contractors will monitor, evaluate and report on the effectiveness of the plan. Furthermore, assessment and evaluation of peak demand management plans by regional Queensland Transport staff will form part of the development phase for the next annual plan, ensuring continuity and continuous improvement in the process. Critically, this initiative allows taxi booking companies to better utilise existing vehicles that are otherwise on standby as substitute taxis. Typically, taxi booking companies designate up to 10 per cent of their fleet as substitute vehicles. Currently those vehicles can only operate when a taxi is off the road due to mechanical failure. In such cases, a substitute taxi may be placed on the road until the taxi is repaired. With the introduction of peak demand management plans and for a reasonable fee, the substitute taxis will also be able to service peak demand periods, providing better fleet utilisation for taxi booking companies and better service for taxi patrons. 09 Oct 2007 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 3267

The amendments contained in this bill will also provide Queensland Transport with increased penalties should taxi booking companies fail to meet performance standards under service contracts. While every effort is being made to achieve good service delivery through a partnership with industry, it is essential that the government has in place appropriate penalties for use when circumstances warrant it. The bill will provide the basis for implementing new and improved taxi services in Queensland. In closing, I acknowledge the stakeholders in the taxi industry, including the Taxi Council, for their partnership with the Queensland government, particularly in providing assistance with the provision of secure taxi ranks. I also acknowledge the taxidrivers. In our community they are a group of workers that often do not get a mention. Driving taxis is difficult work. Drivers work long hours. At times they have customers they would prefer not to have. They can work under very difficult and trying circumstances. I take this opportunity on behalf of the community to thank them for providing essential transport services to the people of Queensland. I also thank the previous Minister for Transport and Main Roads, the Hon. Paul Lucas, our Deputy Premier, who introduced this bill. I commend the bill to the House. Mr FENLON (Greenslopes—ALP) (3.42 pm): I rise to speak in support of the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 2007. I am particularly interested in the reforms to the limousine industry that are contained in this omnibus bill. In some respects the bill is very much underpinned by the need to protect the public, certainly in terms of guaranteeing the safety of individuals who step into various modes of publicly available transport. In a more general sense, it ensures that the use of those vehicles does not create problems at taxi ranks and other places such as congestion or disputes over their supply. Therefore, the bill is very important in terms of public interest. Amendments contained in the bill introduce several critical reforms to improve service delivery in the limousine industry. The amendments will create a new category of limousine, special purpose limousines, and will require general purpose limousine operators to maintain electronic records of bookings. These changes are a significant step aimed at achieving a customer-responsive service that meets the community needs in a changing marketplace. Included in the amendments are changes to enable greater flexibility for operators, recognising the special nature of some of their services. Whole of Queensland limousine licences currently cost about $130,000. The availability of licences across Queensland is carefully controlled to ensure the security of the investment made by operators. Often that is a very important investment for operators as it is their superannuation; it is their investment in their future and their income for the rest of their lives. However, a small part of the industry does not want to provide conventional limousine services. Those operators usually have one or two privately owned classic vehicles, for example, a 1927 Model A Ford or a 1930s Hupmobile, which are magnificent vehicles. Often the expense of purchasing and maintaining those vehicles means that the operators themselves place limits on the type of work that they will do. The vehicles are usually reserved for specific purposes, such as weddings and school formals. Those limits place obvious restrictions on the return that operators can generate and rule out a conventional limousine licence as the cost simply cannot be recovered. Queensland Transport is aware of instances where such vehicles have been used to provide chauffeur driven services for a fee. This activity is illegal as those services should only be provided by an appropriately licensed and accredited vehicle. That illegal behaviour does not provide a sufficient safeguard for the travelling public. The service provider does not have the appropriate insurance. Consequently, those types of services do not provide any form of safety net for the customer in the case of an accident, nor does the driver meet a minimum level of competence and accreditation. Exposing the general public to this level of risk is clearly unacceptable. That said, the government does recognise that there is a middle ground to enable those types of operators. The bill creates a special purpose limousine licence which is a new category of limousine licence. SPLs will provide a service especially for weddings, formals and tourist services. Vehicles will have a minimum age of 30 years, clearly distinguishing them from conventional commercial limousines. Licences will be leased on an annual basis for a set fee of $2,000. SPLs will provide the public with a greater choice of vehicle operations for very special occasions. In addition, this allows owners of special, unique and older vehicles to enter a market previously not available to them. Once the changes to the legislation are implemented, special purpose limousines will provide Queensland customers with the confidence that the vehicle and the services meet a minimum recognised performance standard, while giving them the opportunity to share in the experience of driving in those classic cars. The bill also addresses another side of the limousine industry, which is touting and plying for hire. That practice has seen some limousine operators engaging in unfair practices in direct competition with the taxi industry. That is unfair because limousine operators do not pay the same price for licences as taxidrivers and operators. The practice also directly conflicts with how it is intended that those two industries operate. Limousines are required to operate under a prebooking arrangement and can only stand in approved locations waiting for work. Most such limousine ranks operate on the Gold Coast. 3268 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 09 Oct 2007

The bill will make it a requirement for limousine operators to have an electronic recording as evidence of pre-booking for services. Present limousine service licence conditions do not require limousine operators to keep a record of a prior booking. While limousine operators must only provide services to customers who have pre-booked their journey, it is currently difficult to determine if a pre- booking exists. This anomaly has enabled unscrupulous operators to ply for hire—that is, approach customers directly offering transport services. This reform will require limousine operators, when not at an approved rank, to record pre- bookings for services on an electronic passenger booking recording system. This system will allow departmental officers to quickly confirm the existence of a prior booking and enable more effective compliance with the regulations governing the operation of limousine services. This initiative will reduce the instances of limousine drivers and operators acting illegally by making it easier for Queensland Transport inspectors to detect when illegal activity has occurred. This reform will improve the integrity of the limousine industry in Queensland. It is worth noting that the requirement for an electronic passenger recording system does not apply to SPL licences. For these licences, either paper or electronic booking recording systems are considered appropriate. This option recognises the part-time nature of SPLs. This bill will provide the basis for implementing new improved limousine services across Queensland and I certainly welcome the introduction of the taxi and limousine reform package of initiatives delivered by this bill. I commend the previous minister for transport, the Hon. Paul Lucas, and the current minister for their good work in bringing this important piece of legislation before the House. Ms JARRATT (Whitsunday—ALP) (3.51 pm): I am very pleased to stand in support of the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill. I welcome the initiatives contained in the bill that address the issues of safety on our roads. I am shocked by the statistics that show that in 2006 articulated heavy vehicles had a fatal crash rate of 18 times that of cars and that, despite comprising only two and a half per cent of registered vehicles in this state, heavy vehicles accounted for 10.3 per cent of fatal crashes. The Whitsunday electorate comprises 200 kilometres of the Bruce Highway and is a notable fatigue zone. Sadly I have lost count of the number of fatal and non-fatal heavy vehicle accidents that have occurred on this stretch of road in recent years. The Whitsunday electorate sits midway between Brisbane and Cairns, a fact which has resulted in needless loss of life as tired drivers either go to sleep and run off the road or make fatal errors due to a lack of concentration. Again just last week a truck driver died when his B-double vehicle left the highway south of Bowen and crashed. I do not know that fatigue was involved in this fatal accident but I do know that another family has lost a father and anything that we can do to save lives on the road is welcome. Significantly, the bill invokes the adoption of national compliance and enforcement reforms which are the result of deliberations of the National Transport Commission. These measures include new general enforcement powers, extension of an existing chain of responsibility provision, new court sanctions and mutual recognition provisions. These provisions are not intended to make life more difficult for law-abiding truck drivers who work very hard in a role that is probably poorly understood by most car drivers. Indeed, to the contrary, the provisions are aimed at preserving life for all who use our roads. I will turn briefly to the provisions that pertain to the limousine industry. I have heard some concerns raised by those opposite. Indeed, the shadow minister raised concerns specifically about the system of electronic recording of bookings by the limousine drivers. I too had a delegation come to my electorate office to discuss this issue. In the Whitsundays, in the main, the limousine drivers are owner drivers and are fairly well known throughout the community. It is probably an unfortunate thing but the way that system is used sometimes comes down to making a phone call to their mobile phone when we want to be picked up from dinner or a function. While making a prior booking for a limousine is always preferable because at least then one knows that they will have that booking, the common practice is that as a person does not know what time they will be finished at a function they can pick up the phone and dial the limousine driver who will, if they are able to, come to take that passenger home or to the next place that they wish to go. The drivers who came to see me were concerned about the fact that their practices of using a mobile phone would exclude them from the requirements to have an electronic recording of a booking. I was a bit concerned about this too because these are independent operators who do not have the backing of a company to provide and manage an electronic booking system such as is used in the taxi industry. I thought I should really get to the bottom of this on behalf of my constituents so I organised a briefing on the topic. Had the shadow minister done this his speech today might have been very different. It certainly allayed a lot of the fears that were expressed to me by my limousine drivers. The fact that in the documents the electronic recording device is referred to as a fixed device does not mean that it has to be bolted to the car. It has been explained to me along the lines that a jack is a fixed item in a car but it is not necessarily bolted on at any place in the car. Indeed, a mobile phone constitutes an electronic booking device. The requirement would be that, if asked to, some evidence could be shown that a booking had been made and the receipt of a number on that phone could be 09 Oct 2007 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 3269 traced back as evidence of such a booking. The driver should then, and will be required to, make a more long-term recording of that booking and that could be entered into a log or onto a computer or some other form of database that would suffice in terms of the record required over that next five-year period. I have been assured that the level of concern is unwarranted. To that extent, the department has given an undertaking to continue to have further discussions with the Limousine Association Queensland to come to an agreement about what actually constitutes an electronic record of booking. Those details can be included in the regulations at a later time. I am happy to reassure the limousine drivers in my electorate and those across the state that they should not fear this legislation. This legislation is about abiding by the principles that they have agreed to in terms of securing the industry. I support the bill and I commend both the former minister and the current minister for bringing it to the House. Mr WEIGHTMAN (Cleveland—ALP) (3.57 pm): I rise in support of the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 2007. In particular, I would like to speak about some of the provisions in the bill that are aimed at improving compliance with heavy vehicle operational requirements. Queensland’s economy is booming and with that comes an inevitable increase in road freight and heavy vehicles on the road. Without comprehensive management of the whole transport logistics chain, heavy vehicles may pose a concern to the safety of all road users. On a per vehicle basis, articulated heavy vehicles are already more likely than cars to be involved in fatal road crashes. This bill contains provisions relating to the chain of responsibility. The aim of the chain of responsibility is to ensure that all parties who influence on-road behaviour are held accountable for breaches of heavy vehicle road transport laws. Under this concept, legal liability can reach beyond the driver and the road transport industry so that the real causes of noncompliance are targeted. As most members would be aware, Queensland has led the country on the chain of responsibility concept, having first introduced it into transport law back in 1998. Queensland was also very much at the forefront in developing the national compliance and enforcement reform package which is encapsulated in the bill before the House today. Queensland’s chain of responsibility provisions seek to identify not only heavy vehicle drivers and operators but also all those persons who have influence in the transport logistics chain. The chain of responsibility concept recognises that often the driver has little say in when and how they should make their delivery. While the chain of responsibility already exists in Queensland legislation, this bill clearly identifies several additional classes of people who have a responsibility in relation to potential breaches of mass, dimension and load restraint requirements. The list of the persons who may now be held responsible for these types of offences includes owners of heavy vehicles, registered operators of heavy vehicles, other persons or people who control or directly influence the loading or operation of the heavy vehicle, consignors of any goods in the heavy vehicle, packers of any goods in the heavy vehicle, and loaders of any goods in the heavy vehicle. Consignees who receive goods in the heavy vehicle may also be held accountable in circumstances where it can be shown that they induced or rewarded a breach of these heavy vehicle operation requirements. This bill not only clarifies responsibility of members of the transport chain but also clearly outlines what steps these persons can take to ensure they are operating legally and safely. The majority of people involved in the road freight industry are just trying to earn an honest dollar and we recognise that. The bill introduces these reasonable steps defences as protection for honest operators. Simply put, if a heavy vehicle offence occurs, parties in the chain of responsibility must demonstrate, firstly, that they did not know and could not reasonably be expected to know of the contravention and, secondly, that they took all reasonable steps to prevent the contravention or that there were no steps that the person could reasonably be expected to have taken to prevent it. A person within the chain of responsibility simply cannot claim they did not know that the driver would break the law. They have to demonstrate that they took steps to ensure the driver did not break the law. On the other hand, if any person in the chain knows that the driver might contravene the law and does nothing about it, or if they deliberately encourage the driver to commit the offence, the bill allows them to be penalised—and rightfully so. The bill also allows the court to make an order for the party to pay three times the profit earned from committing the offence as a commercial benefit penalty. I would like to inform those present that national research has shown that the road safety freight industry wants these reforms. This industry is responsible and committed to removing or changing the behaviour of the minority of operators who use unsafe practices to reduce costs and undercut honest operators. Any reform that applies penalties that strip these minority operators of any commercial advantage arising from breaking a law is applauded by those in the industry doing the right thing. Doing the right thing in this case means making Queensland roads safer and lengthening the life span of valuable state infrastructure. I referred earlier to Queensland’s strong track record in improving heavy vehicle transport laws. Since the introduction of chain of responsibility legislation, Queensland Transport has prosecuted 529 offenders on 3,049 charges, with fines totalling more than $1.5 million. Over $1 million of those fines has 3270 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 09 Oct 2007 come from an influencing person—that is, a party further up the chain of responsibility than just the truck driver. In May 2000, for example, Ladbrokes Services Pty Ltd, in a test case for chain of responsibility, was fined $18,000 over 168 mass related offences. Significantly, this was the first time an owner was prosecuted along with the drivers. More recently, in May 2005 the three owners and eight drivers of Geoff Richards Refrigerated Transport Pty Ltd were fined $165,400 over 306 charges related to driving hours and logbooks. Legislation that enhances chain of responsibility provisions can only be a good thing for a state that already has 82,500 heavy vehicles on the road. By 2020 the Bureau of Transport and Regional Economics estimates that one in four vehicles on Queensland roads will be a commercial vehicle. These amendments will play a significant role in regulating that ever-increasing sector of our economy. The bill also gives transport inspectors and police officers enhanced powers to ensure that breaches of transport law can be rapidly investigated. These officers are specialists who receive extensive training in the road rules, in the identification and collection of evidence relevant to transport legislation and in the preparation of court prosecutions. We are talking about a group of highly trained individuals with a strong commitment to improving road safety. Some of the new powers to be introduced by the bill include warrantless entry and search powers. Importantly, however, this power can only be exercised in very limited circumstances. This includes entering premises in relation to a heavy vehicle that has been involved in a road crash causing death, injury or damage to property where the authorised officer suspects there is an imminent danger of evidence relating to the crash being destroyed. These warrantless entry provisions will not apply to residential premises. They will apply to business premises but only during business hours. These are vital powers, similar to those available for other special inspectorate groups within Queensland aimed at the preservation of valuable evidence. A number of safeguards have been included in the bill to protect the rights of individuals. The main protection is the inclusion of the requirement of post entry approval to be obtained from a magistrate. These safeguard provisions, which are not contained in the national model legislation, will help to ensure that these powers are exercised in a responsible manner. The public has a right to expect that public roads can be travelled in safety and that these roads do not become a playground for a minority of operators whose only consideration is financial. This bill provides the necessary powers, balanced with appropriate control, to ensure that all parties in the transport chain of responsibility are held accountable for the influence they have. I compliment the previous minister and his staff and the current minister and his staff for bringing this legislation before the House, and I commend the bill to the House. Ms STRUTHERS (Algester—ALP) (4.06 pm): Road transport is the dominant mode of freight method in Queensland, despite the great benefits of rail. I must say that I am a big fan of trains and am using quite a few of them at the moment. The national freight yard is located in my backyard in Acacia Ridge. It is a great facility and lots of my local residents work there. Sadly, many businesses in my local area, when I asked about their use of rail freight, said that they favoured the direct route from point A to B without the double handling that comes with rail freight. So there are a lot of issues. Certainly the lack of federal government investment in track upgrades on the national freight line has meant that it is been less positive for businesses to use rail freight because of the lack of timeliness on occasion with rail freight compared to road freight. I know a lot of people in my local area are complaining about heavy vehicles using our local roads. I am very pleased that this bill makes a number of very positive changes to the industry to improve road safety. I support the bill because, among other things, it aims to improve road safety and traffic management with new investigative powers and penalties for breaches of heavy vehicle, mass dimension, loading and driver fatigue management requirements. The most significant amendments in this bill are the adoption of the national compliance and enforcement reforms for heavy vehicles and improvements to the taxi and limousine industries. These are the two areas that I will be commenting on. My local area is a transport and economic hub of south- east Queensland. We need the trucks to distribute freight in and out of our area, but we need to ensure that these vehicles use the main roads and the Logan Motorway, not the local roads, and we need to ensure that trucks are driven safely and responsibly. I commend the former minister—and I am sure the new minister will take his lead in this regard—for doing a lot of work with departmental officers and other stakeholders to get the changes needed to ensure that heavy vehicles do use roads like the Logan Motorway. A fair bit has already been done to try to keep them off local roads, past some of the schools in other areas. Some of them are doing rat-runs through Pallara, down Ritchie Road, using Blunder Road. Until that is upgraded fully, that is certainly not a desirable route. Crash statistics in Queensland have highlighted the potential hazard heavy vehicles can pose when not managed properly, and the figures for 2006 are very disturbing. When taking into account rigid trucks, articulated trucks, road trains and B-doubles, there were something like 53 fatal crashes in Queensland. This represented something like 16 per cent of the Queensland road toll. So we are 09 Oct 2007 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 3271 certainly dealing with a significant problem. The recent increases in fatal crashes can be attributed to increasing numbers of heavy vehicles, but it is certainly alarming that we had something like 53 fatalities last year. I know firsthand the impact of a truck colliding with a car. My family were involved in a serious accident at Mudgeeraba many years ago when my cousin and her young baby died. We hit a truck loaded with scrap metal and all of us ended up in the very good care of the Gold Coast Hospital for many weeks and, for some of us, months. It is certainly something we want to try to prevent and it is very positive that we are seeing these national road rules in Queensland leading the way in many areas. With regard to the taxi industry, there are a number of changes that will improve access to taxis in peak hours that will enhance not only the amenity but also the safety of the taxi industry. There have been a number of moves to have security officers stationed around taxi ranks, and that is all very positive. Certainly, if you are waiting in a dark area—I know when I leave functions at night sometimes I am waiting outside a function centre on my own and not feeling very safe. I was at the Gold Coast recently after a function and a couple of fellows who were pretty intoxicated were hanging around hassling a number of people. A very kind young fellow said to me, ‘Please share my cab.’ I was taking a risk in doing that, but it was a lesser risk than hanging around with the drunks. It is certainly very important that taxis are timely and that we have more taxis in peak times so that people can readily move about. The other issue I want to take the opportunity to raise with the minister is not covered in the bill but it is something that I think needs future attention. It has been given some coverage because I have raised this with the former minister over the past year or so. We need to be very clear about what opportunities we provide into the future for safety seats for infants and babies in taxis. At the moment people carry their own baby capsules and insert them into taxis themselves. In other states there are some projects and schemes underway whereby when you book a taxi and ask for it they will provide people with a baby capsule or a safety seat. I ask the minister to keep an eye on developments in this regard. I will certainly be talking with him more about this. It is certainly important that we make the taxi industry as safe as possible and travel within taxis as safe as possible for all passengers, including infants and babies. I congratulate the new minister on his new role. I know he will take to this role as he does to many others and that is with a great deal of determination. I wish him well in that role. Mr LANGBROEK (Surfers Paradise—Lib) (4.12 pm): I rise to speak to the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill. I would like to share a story with the House which demonstrates why the amendments contained within this Transport Legislation Amendment Bill, which amends the Transport Operations (Passenger Transport) Act 1994, are so necessary. It is about some young people of my acquaintance; in fact, many are friends of mine. We have had dinner parties. A few Saturday nights ago these young people were having a gathering in Burleigh Heads. They were enjoying some champagne and conversation until about 10 pm. They are twenty-somethings and they decided to head into Surfers Paradise for a dance. One of the group contacted Regent Taxis to order a taxi, while another poured another round of drinks. At 10.30 pm they rang again and were assured their order was a priority. At 11 pm—still waiting—they rang again and were told a taxi was on its way. By midnight when their taxi had not yet arrived they decided to take the risk and drive. These were not young teenagers deliberately flouting the law or rebelling against the system. They are responsible, professional, respected members of the community who were simply sick of waiting for a taxi. Thankfully, they arrived at their destination safely and left the vehicle in a car park overnight when they left in the early hours of the morning. Again, faced with the trouble of waiting in line for a taxi, as often happens in the middle of Surfers, they walked to a nearby hotel and called a taxi from reception. The point is that for many the temptation to drive home from Surfers early that next morning would have been too strong. That is why incredible numbers of people are still being caught by the DUI laws. People cannot believe it is happening but it is happening because of frustration and the lack of public transport options. I know that has been addressed relatively recently by initiatives that the former minister has brought in and the new minister is overseeing. They are welcome, but more needs to be done in this regard. This is just one tale which illustrates the problem with public and passenger transport in Queensland, particularly around the party precincts on a Friday and Saturday night. One of the elements of the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill seeks to ease the demand for taxi and limousine services by allowing extra taxis to be provided during peak times. Part 5 of the bill seeks to introduce a new section 67A into the Transport Operations (Passenger Transport) Act 1994 that mandates taxi services put in place a peak demand management plan. The peak demand management plan outlines strategies for managing the demand for taxi services during peak patronage periods. Section 67A(3) details what should be in place, including the number of extra taxis commissioned for peak periods; particulars of the days and times of peak demand services; strategies to inform taxidrivers, service operators and the local community about the program; as well as an organisational structure identifying persons responsible for the achievement of the management plan objectives. 3272 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 09 Oct 2007

I note that the bill provides a penalty against people who administer taxi services who do not have such a plan in place. Fines of up to $3,000 can be imposed against those who fail to adhere to the regulation contained in the bill. I think it is time to start enforcing standards against taxi providers. They are in the business of providing transport. Sound business practice suggests that when there is increased demand they need increased services. Among the benefits of having more taxis available and more affordable transport options is that, as I have said before, it will help reduce the number of drink drivers on our roads. I would like to deviate on this point for just a moment, though it is still relevant to the topic of better taxi and passenger transport services. Drink driving is a real problem, not just on the Gold Coast but throughout Queensland and the rest of Australia. We can increase the penalties, which I note this legislation achieves by mandating cumulative sentences rather than concurrent sentences, carry out more random breath tests or even just carry out legitimate ones and educate drivers. However, at the end of the day there are still too many people taking the risk. While we should continue to crack down on drivers who so blatantly break the law from a police and legislative perspective, we need to start looking at why people continue to drive drunk in spite of their better judgement. This is why I think in addition to cracking down on drink drivers and introducing legislation such as this, which will ease the pressure on existing transport services and increase the availability of such services, we should be looking into why there has been no real reduction in the number of drivers caught on the road over the legal limit. In the case I mentioned in my opening address, these young people could not get a taxi. Other people I have spoken to with regard to drink driving and the issue of public and passenger transport have said they risk it after they have been out and had a few because they are trying to save a few dollars. This is why I have welcomed the addition of the FlatFare taxi service on the Gold Coast. Hopefully, if transport is more affordable and available people will think twice about breaking the law. The interesting thing that I have noted from the people I have spoken to about the issue is that people know drink driving is stupid. In the case I mentioned earlier, the driver did know better. She knew she could have lost her licence and that it could have affected her career and her ability to travel overseas, but she took the risk anyway. Why? Because she felt she had no other option. They had tried being responsible by catching a taxi, but they were not prepared to wait more than two hours for it. This legislation, if properly administered, will ensure that taxi operators and other passenger transport providers address the issue of peak patronage times and put in place measures to reduce unacceptably long waiting times. I also note that the bill increases the penalty for transport providers that do not meet key performance indicators, which impose standards such as minimum service levels in commercial service contracts. Taxis provide an invaluable public service, but with that comes a duty to ensure that they do meet their responsibilities. The state government has a responsibility to ensure that these targets are being met, which is why I am supportive of any measure to ensure that taxi providers do meet such standards. Having said that, the government and Queensland Transport also have a significant responsibility to ensure that these standards are fair and attainable. This is vital. In his second reading speech, the minister said increased penalties will provide incentives for operators to meet minimum performance levels. I hope the transport minister’s concept of ‘incentives’ does not mirror the health minister’s, who wants to penalise hospitals for ambulance ramping as a result of bed block, a situation borne out of his government’s gross underinvestment in health over the past decade. The government needs to provide greater support for transport providers, not impose arbitrary and impossible quotas or make obtaining licences and carrying out services more difficult than it has to be. Regent Taxis, for example, on the Gold Coast transport in excess of eight million passengers every year. The call centre alone employs more than 50 staff to process calls 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Greater support for transport providers will ensure both passengers and providers get the best possible service. Another important element of the bill relates to speed and red-light cameras. In 2005 when I was a new member of this House I remember the former minister for transport having a go at me for acknowledging an incident. I think he said, ‘You want to be careful about owning up to things in this place.’ The former member for Kawana said the same thing at the time. Did I get off? No, I did not get off. I did not expect to get off. I paid the fine. But now I hear the Deputy Premier and former minister for transport may have lied under oath to avoid a fine for running a red light. Mr MICKEL: I rise to a point of order. The word is unparliamentary. If you have a look at the standing order with respect to ‘lie’— Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER (Ms Palaszczuk): Order! The member will withdraw that. Mr LANGBROEK: I withdraw. He may well have signed a statutory declaration. We see that he has form for this. At the Shepherdson inquiry he also pleaded the lapse of 15 years about whether he actually lived at Seventh Avenue Coorparoo. Mr MICKEL: Madam Deputy Speaker, I raise a point of order. The Shepherdson inquiry has no relevance to this bill whatsoever. 09 Oct 2007 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 3273

Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The member will come back to the bill. Mr LANGBROEK: The Liberal Party has been impugned in this place every day for the last three months about the Printgate scandal and nothing has come of it. Mr MICKEL: Point of order— Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! There is a point of order. The member for Surfers Paradise will resume his seat and I will listen to the point of order. Mr MICKEL: You asked the member to withdraw. He should show some respect for the chair. Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I have listened to the point of order. I want the member to come back to the bill and please confine his comments to the bill at hand. Mr LANGBROEK: I am pleased to note the amendments which will extend the period for which proceedings can be commenced against hit-and-run drivers. This is certainly something we have seen too much of on the Gold Coast. Hopefully this will serve as another deterrent for drivers who attempt to avoid the law. The bill will also bring Queensland’s law into line with the national legislative regime as it pertains to heavy vehicles. With regard to long distance road travel, it is important that we achieve uniform laws so that similar high standards are upheld in every state including Queensland. Mr CRIPPS (Hinchinbrook—NPA) (4.21 pm): I rise to make a contribution to the debate on the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 2007. The most significant amendments in this bill are the adoption of national compliance and enforcement reforms for heavy vehicles and changes to the taxi industry affecting the services offered by operators throughout Queensland. The amendments to the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act adopt provisions from the national Road Transport Reform (Compliance and Enforcement) Bill 2003, a Commonwealth bill that seeks to strengthen current heavy vehicle compliance and enforcement processes. The Commonwealth bill is based on recommendations from the National Transport Commission which are designed to achieve national uniformity and to improve compliance with heavy vehicle operating requirements. The bill seeks to influence changes to the on-road behaviour of those involved in the heavy vehicle transport industry and to ensure the accountability of all parties influencing compliance with the heavy vehicle transport laws. This extends to off-road parties which is an innovative development for this piece of legislation. The stated aim of the legislation is to ensure that all parties who influence on- road behaviour are held accountable for breaches of road transport laws. Under this concept, legal liability can reach beyond the driver to other parties both within and outside the road transport industry so that the real causes of noncompliance with road transport laws are targeted. The explanatory notes accompanying the bill indicate that heavy vehicles are significantly overrepresented in crashes causing fatalities, relative to other classes of vehicles. Specifically, the explanatory notes state that heavy vehicles such as road trains, B-doubles and triples have a fatal crash rate 18 times higher than that of cars. That is very statistically significant. Recent increases in fatal crashes involving trucks can be attributed in part to the increases in the number of trucks travelling on Queensland roads. The statistics cited in the explanatory notes indicate that the use of trucks to transport freight is forecast to double between the year 2000 and 2020. Without appropriate regulation of the road freight industry this has the potential to significantly impact on Queensland’s future road toll. The bill’s stated aim is to remove any unfair competitive advantage that may result from the breach of those transport regulations. To this end, the bill proposes amendments to: provide a scheme for encouraging compliance with the requirements of Queensland’s road transport laws and for the enforcement of those requirements; encourage a change in the on-road behaviour of those involved in the transport industry by removing commercial benefit for breaching heavy vehicle road rules; strengthen powers for enforcement officers to improve intelligence gathering and prosecution outcomes; refine provisions to recognise all parties who affect road transport compliance and ensure that they can be held accountable for their actions and omissions where they result in a breach of the transport law; and implement national heavy vehicle compliance and enforcement measures thereby removing cross- jurisdictional variations. Earlier this year the Transport Legislation and Another Act Amendment Bill was debated in this place. One section of that bill was the subject of a disallowance motion moved by the opposition. During debate on the disallowance motion, which related to proposed increases in financial penalties and demerit points for drivers, I advocated that the government consider the lack of rest bays available to heavy vehicle drivers on heavy vehicle transport routes. This may mean that drivers have to time their stops and pull up short of their allocated driving times because they know that there are no rest bays or no roadhouses for another two hours or so along their particular route. That penalises the drivers themselves when they are given unrealistic driving times and relates to the stated intention of this bill which is to reduce incentives to break the law. 3274 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 09 Oct 2007

I reiterate the point for the benefit of the new transport minister. There need to be more of these rest bays and these rest bays ought to have sufficient space to take a number of heavy vehicles. There ought to be appropriate facilities provided at these rest bays so that the truckies can get out and have a shower and a proper sleep. This will improve safety on our roads. I might suggest to the minister that he give serious consideration to building extra rest bays and appropriate facilities. Amongst other things, the bill proposes to require a defendant challenging the image from a photographic detection device, the functioning or visibility of a traffic device or the accuracy or operation of a speed detection device to give written notice of the grounds of challenge that they intend to rely upon. I am a little concerned about this particular amendment. I can appreciate that there are circumstances where a defendant could legitimately be asked to disclose the basis on which they intend to challenge an infringement notice, for example, on the basis that a traffic control device or a speed detection device was calibrated incorrectly or positioned incorrectly. However, I would be concerned if the defendant was asked to provide details about the evidence they intend to use in support of their challenge. There ought to be at least some burden on those prosecuting such traffic infringements to substantiate the accuracy of the information that they use to issue the infringement notice. The bill also amends the Maritime and Other Legislation Amendment Act to extend cumulative driver disqualification provisions to apply to disqualifications resulting from drug-driving offences. I am again reminded of the debate in this parliament earlier this year on the Transport Legislation and Another Act Amendment Bill, which involved amendments to the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995, to introduce random drug testing for drivers on the collection and analysis of a specimen of saliva. My colleagues and I from the Queensland coalition certainly supported that initiative. It was a very positive step forward as far as road safety was concerned. There is absolutely no reason this initiative should not be extended to boat licences. Once again I commend the government for this initiative with respect to drug driving regardless of the wheel they are behind—be it a vehicle or a vessel. The bill amends the Transport Operations (Passenger Transport) Act to require all taxi service contract holders to develop and submit for Queensland Transport approval an annual peak demand management plan. Amongst other things, the bill proposes to introduce peak demand taxi permits to increase the number of taxis during peak times such as Friday and Saturday nights and major events. Meeting demand at peak patronage periods and maintaining high levels of public safety are key related issues. A major challenge for transport services is flexibility in providing these services at peak times and for special events. The amendments in this bill are aimed at providing an environment for the taxi operators to meet the demand at these critical times through introduction of the annual peak demand management plans. The plans will be required to nominate the number of peak demand taxi permits they require to meet demand during these identified periods. To provide additional taxis during peak periods without saturating the non-busy times, a peak demand taxi will only be able to operate during the peak demand periods identified in that management plan lodged with Queensland Transport. I hope these changes allowing for the issuing of peak demand taxi permits will be able to address an issue which taxi operators in my electorate in the Mission Beach area have recently raised. In June this year I was contacted by a constituent of mine, Carol Goldsmith, from Mission Beach. Carol is the owner and operator of Mission Beach Taxis, a small business catering to the transport needs of the communities in that area including Bingle Bay, Mission Beach, Wongaling Beach and South Mission Beach. Carol contacted me to voice her frustrations about dealing with the department of transport and its apparent unwillingness to review a situation where there was a shortage of transport options in the Mission Beach area which meant that an extra taxi licence for the district was badly needed, particularly during its peak times such as Friday and Saturday nights. Mission Beach is a major tourism area. As such, a large number of people in the area out at licensed premises during these peak periods are visitors to the area and do not have their own transport available and do not have family members available to pick them up. Logically they turn to taxis to get to and from these licensed premises, driving demand higher on top of the ordinary demand from the permanent resident population. The results of the lack of transport options in the local area have begun to manifest themselves in increased instances of driving under the influence offences in the local area. Carol contacted me after a letter to the department of transport in June this year had not resulted in positive action to address the problem. I contacted the department and was advised that a survey of the Mission Beach area was required to try to ascertain if the district required another taxi licence. But these surveys do not appreciate or take into account these peak periods, especially in high-tourism areas like Mission Beach where the population can be inflated at peak tourism times like the September school holidays, which have just passed. Operators of licensed premises in the Mission Beach area recently formed the Mission Beach Liquor Accord in response to the issue of increased driving under the influence offences raised by the Queensland Police Service, which attends the Mission Beach Liquor Accord meetings. The Mission Beach Liquor Accord is trying to address issues like the lack of patron transport options and other issues 09 Oct 2007 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 3275 of mutual concern relating to the sale of liquor in the area. The transport options available for patrons leaving licensed premises are one of the key issues identified by the police and the Mission Beach Liquor Accord. Having extra taxi licences is viewed as an important part of addressing this issue and reducing a range of offences, including driving under the influence offences. Having made inquiries on behalf of Carol earlier this year with respect to the issue of trying to secure another taxi licence for the Mission Beach area, the Mission Beach Liquor Accord issued me with an invitation to attend its recent meeting on Tuesday, 25 September. I accepted the invitation and was pleased to see a good representation of the licensed premises in attendance in addition to four local police officers and local taxi operators. The Queensland Police Service certainly raised particular concerns about the number of driving under the influence offences in the Mission Beach area. Owners of licensed premises expressed concern about the transport options for patrons and looked to solutions. They looked to the taxi operators for these solutions, who advised that they were constrained by their inability to secure extra taxi licences from the department of transport. I have recently written to the minister for transport to express my disappointment that the department of transport, which had been invited to attend that particular meeting of the Mission Beach Liquor Accord, did not send a representative. This is a genuine attempt made by the Mission Beach Liquor Accord to address issues relating to the responsible service of alcohol in the Mission Beach area, and transport options for patrons to and from licensed premises are an important part of developing a solution to these issues. I hope the department of transport will take a more proactive approach in the future to pursuing these types of issues, particularly where local operators are being so proactive and working in partnership with key stakeholders like the Queensland Police Service to identify and solve these problems. The Mission Beach area needs extra taxi licences, particularly in those peak demand periods. Local taxi operators need the cooperation and assistance of the department to achieve this. It will hopefully give patrons more flexible transport options and will hopefully reduce the number of those driving under the influence offences in the area. I certainly think that the amendments in this bill could facilitate a solution to this problem. With those comments on the record, I support the bill. Mrs CUNNINGHAM (Gladstone—Ind) (4.33 pm): I rise to speak to the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 2007 and to follow up on the previous speaker’s comments in relation to peak demand management plans proposed for those periods of time when public transportation, particularly for the purposes of safety, is important. There have been a number of problems over time in Gladstone in relation to the availability of taxis and the long wait times. Ironically, in today’s Observer there was an article in relation to that issue which advises that, whilst an additional cab licence has been allocated to the area, there remain significant wait times during peak times, particularly in the waterfront area. In Gladstone there is one particular precinct where young people go to two clubs, with varying degrees of reputation I guess. In fact, taxis refuse to go to one of the club areas because they have had so many problems. I want to quote from an article highlighting the story of Jackie Zimmerman, who herself has had problems catching taxis in the past. A second story in that article relaying Katrina’s story states— I am writing to you in regard to the taxi service here or maybe I should say lack of taxi service. I am hoping you can report this in your paper at some stage soon as I am aware of many recent crimes happening in the local area such as rapes and drink spiking etc. I believe these are directly linked to the fact that you can’t get a taxi when one is called and people are left with no option but to walk home. I went out with my friend last night (early September) and injured myself quite badly when I was leaving (fell down some stairs). We then called a taxi. This was approximately 1am. We then waited 40 minutes before calling a taxi again. By this time my foot was extremely painful as you could imagine. Then after waiting a further 20 minutes I called the taxi myself and was told by the man who answered that no bookings are generally taken for that area (Flinders Parade) but he would send one and also told me he would ‘get in trouble’ for making a booking. We were outside a restaurant but well away from nightclubs. After waiting a further 20 minutes I had enough and called my husband who had to wake my two young children to come and pick us up. My friend was ready to walk all the way back to my house to get the car to drive me home. Do you think I’m correct in the belief that many young women are forced to make their own way home after a night out because of this taxi situation where they are reluctant to even pick people up? I think it is a disgrace to this town that people are left to wander the streets considering this is not even a major city. I believe if this problem was addressed there would be a lot less crime happening if people were not left to sit in gutters waiting for endless hours for a taxi that never comes. I do not believe that the lack of a taxi service could ever be used as an excuse for attacks on women or indeed as an excuse for attacks on anyone. That type of behaviour is not only criminal; it is unacceptable, selfish and any other negative word that you can think of. Whilst I do not believe a lack of a taxi service in any town should be used, as I said, as an excuse for attacks on women—whether they be rapes or physical assaults—it is a contributing factor and one, as Katrina says, that forces young people to be out walking in perhaps environments where it is not exactly appropriate. 3276 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 09 Oct 2007

The taxi service in Gladstone is in the process of preparing a peak demand management plan once that option becomes available. Gladstone does not have huge public transport availability in the city, and certainly not after-hours and on Friday and Saturday nights when the clubs are fairly heavily patronised. There is certainly no public transport to any extent other than taxis and a couple of courtesy buses. The taxi industry has tried to respond with a larger taxi which is able to take bigger groups in order to respond to the party groups. I believe its will is to try to improve the service, and I commend the former minister and the current minister for the initiatives in this legislation. This legislation also provides powers to enter places of business in relation to heavy vehicles. Whilst I acknowledge that the places that may be entered without the occupier’s consent or without a warrant are places of business, these additional powers are concerning. They are not new and I do not pretend to believe that no other legislation contains such powers. But as a community we seem to be constantly giving away our rights, liberties and freedoms because we have greater pressures placed upon us—pressures such as terrorism and such things—to more and more have our rights and freedoms undermined or evaporated. I believe that there are many, many good truck drivers. I believe that many members would have family members or friends who drive large articulated vehicles, B-doubles and other large vehicles. Members such as the member for Gregory would know of people who drive road trains. I am sure that each of them would be able to tell stories of responsible drivers. But those who ride the highways in any way, shape or form know that there are heavy transport drivers who are driving tired. I find it very concerning that some heavy transport vehicle drivers tailgate. Only last week I had reason to be on the Bruce Highway and saw a B-double behind a rigid truck. The B-double was about a metre and a half behind the rigid truck and was travelling at highway speeds. That is not an isolated incident, either. Those trucks will come up behind you and you cannot actually see their headlights because the back of your vehicle has blocked them. If you had to stop for a roo or anything, you would be gone; the truck would go over the top of you. I am sure there have been instances in which people in sedan vehicles have been incinerated in such circumstances. Nobody has witnessed such accidents to give evidence but I guess there is a lot of supposition about the causes of such accidents. There are other instances of truckies forcing smaller vehicles off the road, particularly at the end of passing lanes when trucks have tried to overtake the vehicle but have been just a bit underpowered to complete the overtaking manoeuvre. The new powers contained in this legislation, and the powers that police have already, will help to address the problems caused by those drivers. Those drivers drive very heavy vehicles—vehicles with a very large mass and a huge capacity for speed and momentum. As I said, while many drivers of heavy vehicles are responsible, the ones who drive tired—because they are pressured by the boss to do so—are a problem. They are—and I use this word deliberately— blackmailed by inconsiderate and malicious bosses to drive when they should be having a rest. But those drivers who drive with drugs or alcohol, who tailgate and cause those other problems that people in sedans and smaller vehicles face deserve to face the full force of the law. This legislation introduces a chain of responsibility that does not just target the driver as being responsible in terms of proper and safe driving but also the operators. Although the member for Tablelands expressed some concern about the reverse onus of proof, and I share those concerns, we have to have a system for the drivers and those who push the drivers’ buttons. I refer to the bosses who operate the transportation companies and who can make threats to the drivers if they do not comply with onerous and, in some instances, illegal driving programs. There has to be some way for those drivers to have recourse in terms of their own safety. I have a concern about clause 39, which provides the power to stop private vehicles. I know the current minister was not the minister at the time the bill was introduced—and I thank the officers for their briefing on the bill during the last sittings; they were going to get back to me with some information and for all sorts of reasons that has not happened—but I put this question to the minister. This clause gives the power to an authorised officer to stop a private vehicle. It states—

Also, an authorised officer who is not a police officer and is not wearing a uniform approved by the chief executive may only exercise the powers of an authorised officer in relation to a private vehicle if the officer reasonably believes the vehicle is so dangerous as to be likely to cause the death of, or injury to, a person. I know that that clause refers to extreme circumstances, but I want to put on the public record my serious concern about that clause—unless there is more information that the minister can give me. Most of us here have children—daughters—who drive. We say to them, ‘Lock your doors. When you get in the car, particularly when you are driving for long distances or if you have to stop at traffic lights, lock your doors so that people cannot jump in. Do not stop. If someone indicates to you to stop on the highway, do not stop. If they indicate to you to stop in the city, do not stop. Go to a place that is lit—a police station or a garage—and where there are witnesses. Even if the police car is an unmarked car and you believe that it is a police officer, go to a place where it is safe.’ We as parents say, ‘We will back you to the hilt if you get into strife.’ 09 Oct 2007 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 3277

This particular clause allows for somebody not in a police car, not in a uniform, to indicate, with power, that a private vehicle should stop. The minister has indicated that he is going to provide some extra information in his reply. That would be great, because if what is printed here is what is intended, I have to oppose that part of the legislation. As I said, we constantly struggle to have our children use the highway safely, because there are mongrels out there who will try to take advantage of them and worse. In relation to the rest times for heavy vehicles, the member for Hinchinbrook talked about shower facilities at pull-off areas. Ideally, it would be wonderful if every pull-off point on a highway could have a shower and a toilet for the drivers. It would be magic but, practically speaking, I think we are a very long way from that ever occurring. However, it is important that people driving heavy transport can pull off safely into a parking bay. In that regard, old highways have been of great use. When a new highway is built, an old part of the highway has remained accessible and a small pull-off and pull-on area is created. Those areas are bitumen so that there is no dust and the drivers are able to pull off. In terms of garages and service stations being used by truck drivers, a lot of angst is caused if those garages are located close to homes and refrigerated trucks are parked there. There has to be some give and take and some common sense in relation to the use of such facilities. But certainly there should be somewhere where drivers can pull off safely and not be subjected to constantly seeing headlights from passing vehicles. Finally, I want to talk about one of the amendments that have been subsequently circulated, and that is the amendment that changes the time frame in which offence proceedings can take place from three years to five years. I refer to a circumstance in relation to a hit-and-run driver which occurred in 1998. I would be interested in the minister’s comment in relation to changing the legislation if the offence occurred over five years ago but there is new evidence that has been collected after that period. Is there any possibility of allowing for that new evidence to be heard? The incident that I am dealing with relates to a young Aboriginal boy who was killed in northern Queensland. Without going into the details, because it is probably not the appropriate place to do so, the perpetrator now boasts of the actions that he took because the statute of limitations has expired. He knows what he has done. He is tormenting the family of the young boy who was killed. There is no justification for what he did. What he did was wrong. Mr Rickuss: It almost should be a manslaughter charge. Mrs CUNNINGHAM: Yes, it should be. At the time the perpetrator was subject to the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act. He did not stay at the scene of the accident. He breached that. In terms of the provisions relating to the careless driving of a motor vehicle, he breached that. The proceedings for the offences under which he could be charged must start within one year after the offence was committed or within six months after the offence comes to the complainant’s knowledge but within two years of the offence being committed. If my recollection is right—and it could be wrong— those changes were brought during the term of the coalition government. The time for bringing charges was shortened to try to get officers and others activated to get proceedings commenced in a more timely manner. Rather than allowing for years for proceedings to be instituted, that period was shortened. So people had to get their act together and get the proceedings started. Even though one always acts with good intent, there will be some unintended consequence. In this instance the unintended consequence is that, a young boy having been killed and a family having lost a lovely little boy, the perpetrator is openly bragging that he was the one who killed the little boy— and he calls him some fairly unsavoury names—and there is nothing that the police can do because of the statute of limitations. I welcome the change from three to five years, but I seek the minister’s comment on the possibility of that being extended to an indefinite period when new evidence comes to hand. In its own way that will limit the flexibility regarding the time within which action can be taken, but it will certainly make it possible to take action when new information becomes available, as happened in that case. I support the bill. The minister administers a difficult area in terms of heavy transportation. I welcome the additional safety that will be brought to our roads. Ms van LITSENBURG (Redcliffe—ALP) (4.51 pm): I rise to speak to the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 2007. This is a wide-ranging bill that aims to adopt provisions from the National Road Transport Reform (Compliance and Enforcement) Bill 2003 and will strengthen current heavy vehicle compliance and enforce processes in Queensland. The national bill is model legislation developed by the National Transport Commission that is designed to achieve national uniformity and to improve compliance with and enforcement of heavy vehicle operation requirements. The reforms further aim to make positive changes to the on-road behaviour of those involved in the heavy vehicle transport industry and to ensure accountability of all parties influencing compliance with heavy vehicle transport laws. This extends to off-road parties and is referred to as the chain of responsibility. The chain of responsibility laws ensure that all parties that influence on-road behaviour are held accountable for breaches of road transport laws. Under this concept, legal liability can reach beyond the driver to other parties both within and outside the transport industry so that the real causes of noncompliance with transport laws are targeted. 3278 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 09 Oct 2007

The chain of responsibility aspects of this legislation mean that many in the road transport industry, particularly those operating on the long haul routes, will need to rethink their policies and methods of operating, including travel time. I have no doubt that many a truckie will heave a sigh of relief that compliance with road laws will not rest totally on their shoulders. Other amendments will also produce safer results for truckies and road users in general. The bill amends, firstly, the Transport Infrastructure Act 1994 to ensure that land that the state has leased for a toll road is able to be subleased and to provide the minister with the ability to impose an end date for the tolling period. Secondly, the Transport Planning and Coordination Act is amended to confirm that acquisitions of land for the purposes of a busway occurring after 13 October 2000, regardless of whether the acquisition was by the chief executive of the Department of Main Roads or Queensland Transport, are taken to have been lawful acquisitions. Thirdly, references to the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships give new definitions for noxious liquid substances and the new categorisation of noxious liquid substances. Lastly, the bill requires all taxi service contract holders to develop and submit for Queensland Transport approval an annual peak demand management plan, introduces peak demand taxi permits to increase the number of taxis during peak times such as Friday and Saturday nights and major events, and increases penalties for passenger transport contract holders that do not meet the key requirements of their service contracts. This amendment introduces special purpose limousine service licences for weddings, school formals and tourist services, and requires limousine operators to use a passenger booking and recording system, with penalties for noncompliance. Peak demand management plans for taxis will be an effective tool to manage those high-demand periods such as Friday and Saturday nights, particularly late at night when many people require taxis. Often people are left waiting on the street for long periods, and that can lead to safety issues. Those long delays can encourage people to drive when they have been drinking. The amendments will help keep our young people safe on the weekends and will help many parents feel more at ease about their young people getting home safely. In my own electorate of Redcliffe this is also an issue, particularly during high-profile popular festival days such as our First Settlement Festival or our Festival of Sails. During one of those festivals I have walked home rather than wait an hour for a taxi. I believe that the peak demand permits will not only give contractors the licence to put more taxis on the road at peak times but also give Redcliffe taxidrivers an opportunity to earn extra income. It is important for the continued professionalism of the taxi industry that we ensure that drivers have the opportunity to earn a decent income. In Redcliffe, this can be difficult as the area has defined boundaries, but at peak times it is difficult for them to meet demand. This limits not only the demand for taxis as people do not plan to use them because of the delays but also the incomes of drivers and the ability of the industry to develop a professional service and retain quality drivers. It is great to see legislation that will be a benefit to the taxi industry. However, most importantly, this amendment will produce a far better service for the public. I congratulate the minister for his astuteness in targeting these amendments and for the huge advantages these small amendments will have for many people on the ground. I commend the bill to the House. Mrs SCOTT (Woodridge—ALP) (4.58 pm): Firstly, I offer my congratulations to the minister, the Hon. John Mickel, for his expanded portfolio covering the very important issues of transport and trade. The Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 2007 contains a number of very important measures to add to safety on our roads. It also assists taxi and limousine operators to provide improved services to the public, as well as a number of other issues. As a home-grown Queenslander, back in the late sixties, seventies and early eighties my family and I spent 17 years as refugees in southern states, with five years in Melbourne and 12 in New South Wales just north of Sydney. The highways to Queensland were often traversed on what were mostly narrow carriageways, often facing huge numbers of interstate transport vehicles. During those years there were some horrendous accidents involving semitrailers and passenger buses. Whenever we undertook those long journeys to our home state, we were ever mindful of the risks we faced. It is now 30 years on and there are still narrow carriageways to be traversed. The amendments to the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995 involve national reforms to improve heavy vehicle operation. Wide consultation with industry, police, unions, safety organisations and other Commonwealth and state authorities has now resulted in this uniform legislation covering penalties for breaches of load, vehicle mass and dimension, and driver fatigue. All of these issues can severely compromise safety on our roads. Heavy vehicles are overrepresented in our road safety statistics resulting in 54 road fatalities in Queensland in 2006 with many more injuries. There is no doubt who is most vulnerable when a heavy vehicle collides with a car. There is often no chance for the occupants of the car. New mass categories are being introduced to cover three zones of risk with the most serious being where a load is 20 per cent or more above the limit, the present serious load limit being 60 per cent over. Similarly, penalties will apply for breaches of recommended dimensions and loadings. The 09 Oct 2007 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 3279 most important issue within this part of the bill is the legal liability which will now stretch beyond the driver to transport operators or to a consignor who provides wrong information on the weight of a load. In this case the penalty for wrong information can be as high as three times the potential profit of the load. There are also penalties outlined to ensure crucial evidence may not be tampered with, corrupted or destroyed. In our inner-city area, the provision for peak demand taxis will assist in moving large numbers of patrons at high-use times such as Friday and Saturday evenings and following special events. I note the success of the secure taxi queues and the multiple hire scheme and this additional measure will also help reduce wait times. Similarly, the regulations relating to limousine operations will bring into line some operators who are now operating illegally and require that they have on board at all times their booking schedule prior to the journey. Another amendment will smooth the way for the necessary acquisition of land to ensure major transport infrastructure is delivered in a timely way. May I congratulate the minister, the former minister the Hon. Paul Lucas and those who worked to bring this important legislation to the House. I have much pleasure in supporting the bill. Mr PD PURCELL (Bulimba—ALP) (5.02 pm): Like other members, I have some comments to make with regard to cabs. Most parents in this place at one time or another have been worried about where their children are, how they are getting home and whether they will get home safely. They do not want them to accept rides from people who they should not accept rides from just to get home, they do not want them to take vehicles when they go out for a night on the town, and they do not want them to have to wait around in lines of 100 to 300 people who are all drunk trying to get a cab at the same time. I used to love a sherbet on a Friday and Saturday night. I have been known to have more than I probably should but I was at home and I would not go anywhere. We would open a nice bottle of wine, have tea and probably watch the footy or something else on TV and that would be it for the night. My three eldest children are daughters and then I have two boys. When the girls started going down into the big paddock, as it is called, I stopped drinking on a Friday and Saturday night. I said to them, ‘I do not care what time of the day or night it is, you will ring me and I will come and pick you up. You will not go and stand in a cab line and you will not go home with somebody you have just met that night and do not know’. Because of those arrangements I made sure that I did not touch any alcohol at all. I think that this is an opportunity for the cab industry to get more cabs on the road in those peak periods. Not only would I take my daughter home, there would be two or three of her mates. I would be cab driving all over Brisbane at two or three o’clock in the morning. I have heard the member for Surfers Paradise, the member for Gladstone and other members talk about the concerns they have. Anything that will address making more cabs available at peak times is welcome. I will get in the minister’s ear one night and have a few coffees and a sensible talk about cabs. I know a lot of cab drivers. I used to be a prolific user of cabs. I do not drink these days so I do not have to worry too much. A lot of the blokes who drive cabs are knockabouts. At the moment there would not be too many builders’ labourers driving cabs but a lot of them used to. I would get in a cab and they would know who I was and where I was going because they were workmates of mine over many years. They are there to make a living so I listen to what they have to say. Through the transport industry we supply a fair amount of money to run cab ranks at night, to provide supervision and guards and people to arrange multifare and flat-fare cabs to get people home. Many of the mates that I know who drive cabs do not go to those ranks as they are not well run. They wait longer in a line there to get people into their cab than by just cruising and picking people up off the street. When it is busy they can do that quite easily. I believe that there needs to be very good people running those ranks where there are multihires and people are moved quickly. There needs to be characters there lining up the cab fares and people going in the same direction. They need to know Brisbane and the suburbs that are near one another and they need to be able to make a deal for and on behalf of the cabbie to get people home quickly. Cab drivers are workers who are there to make a living. The cab industry is pretty tough. They are there for hire and accept anybody who gets into their cab. In those peak periods, particularly after the nightclubs and hotels empty people out, people usually have had a little bit to drink and are a little bit cheeky and chatty. Cab drivers put up with a lot. I have sympathy for cab companies as well. They have a lot of downtime. Cabs cost anywhere between $400,000 and $700,000 down the Gold Coast. It is a lot of money to have tied up in something that depreciates as soon as you buy it. An opposition member: It’s like milk weighers, hey, Pat? Mr PURCELL: Yes, okay. There are not very long peak periods and there is a lot of downtime. I have some very firm ideas about how we could utilise the cab industry a lot better than we do. We can do it around large events and we can certainly do it in my previous portfolio to get people away from hospitals. If your grandfather needs to get home from the hospital and he has to sit at the RBH or the PA for three or four hours waiting for an ambulance because he is not a high priority, a cab to get him home is the way to go. I tried to get that on the agenda. I warn the minister that the transport department, the health department and the emergency services department are working on that and have been for two years. It is going nowhere. Things might have moved a lot quicker since I left. 3280 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 09 Oct 2007

We also had an experiment running for three or four years taking people in cabs for dialysis. We know how to do it. I have had long, involved talks with Yellow Cabs. They do it very well. They have been doing it for 30-plus years for the veterans of Australia. We do not need to know too much more except that their drivers have very good first aid. They go into their home to pick them up. They put them in the cab. They inquire when they drop them off at the hospital about when they possibly would need picking up. They have a number to be rung, and they go back and pick them up and then take them back inside when they are finished. It is a service that the industry provides which the health department could work with them on. It would certainly take the pressure off our paramedics and ambulances and make more vehicles available for code 1s if and when they are needed. It is very difficult for paramedics because they do not like to have people waiting around to be picked up. They want to be accommodating—and they all are—but if they are taking someone home and it is more or less a cab ride and then they get a code 1, they still have to take that person home before they respond to the code 1. I would also like to talk to the minister about how we could do it better, particularly in the country areas, with the transport industry and health. In places like Tara, for example, we have one front-line ambulance on duty usually at any one time. If that ambulance is required to take someone in Toowoomba to a specialist, that ambulance is out of town and therefore people who are off roster are on call while they are away. It is about a 5½ to 6½ hour trip to Toowoomba and back, depending on the service and whether the specialist keeps to his or her appointment times. They usually sit up next to the driver. They do not need to lie down. They are not a patient who is crook and who needs a paramedic in attendance. I think we need to use the taxi industry in other ways to get people to and from those hospital appointments, because they have no other means of getting there. There is no bus service. There is no train service, and they do not have a vehicle. They obviously do not have any family who could run them down. That is why the local doctor would sign up for the ambulance to take them. It is not because they need an ambulance. But it is a dangerous practice because it takes front-line ambulances out of country areas. Probably two-thirds of ambulance stations in this state are in the country and they are possibly flat out doing 30 per cent of the work. So it just shows you where the spread is. Getting back to taxis in and around Brisbane, I think we can do it a lot better in regard to the ranks where we have supervision. I could give members the names of about three cab drivers who, if you make it worth their while, will move people. If you pay people well enough, you will get the right people to run those ranks. Not only should they do it in the city where they empty people out of nightclubs; they should also do it at the airport where they empty people out of planes. The first person a tourist comes in contact with is a cab driver. We need to make sure that those cab drivers know where they are going, that they are up to speed and that they look after their passenger. Mr Rickuss: In Singapore they have blokes at night who are dressed up very nicely, ordering cabs, telling you which ones to get into. Mr PURCELL: We just need to do it better. With those few words, we should do anything we can to enhance the cab industry, because it is a very important part of the transport system in Queensland. We need to utilise them more, and we need to give them more work so that they can have more cabs available during peak periods. We need to make sure that during peak periods cab ranks run very well and that people are safe so that I do not have to get a call at two o’clock or three o’clock in the morning saying, ‘Dad, I’m ready to come home now,’ and off you go to pick them up. Then you run all their mates home as well. With those few words, I support the bill. Mrs MILLER (Bundamba—ALP) (5.14 pm): I rise to support the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 2007. This bill’s most significant amendments are the adoption of national compliance and enforcement reforms for heavy vehicles and improvements to the taxi and limousine industries to improve the range of services across Queensland. I am very pleased that a new concept of ‘responsible person’ will be instituted for a heavy vehicle. This is very important so that inquiries can be made to the relevant parties. I am also glad that a new offence has been created for the provision of false or misleading information. This is an extremely important provision. Furthermore, I think it is very good that the courts will be allowed to make a commercial benefit order. This is very good legislation. These reforms are very important because, combined with our government’s view that the Ipswich Motorway must be upgraded, then our roads in and around Ipswich may at some point in time be made safer. I know that many members have spoken about the effect of heavy vehicles on their electorates, but I want to say that the Ipswich Motorway, due to the number of heavy vehicles on that road, is in fact a very dangerous road. It carries an enormous number of heavy vehicles. It contains many trucks—cattle trucks, rubbish trucks going to and from the Thiess landfill and an enormous number of B-doubles. In fact, a lot of people in my electorate avoid using the Ipswich Motorway because they believe they are taking their life in their own hands when they even try to get on the on-ramps and up onto the motorway, particularly in the mornings and the afternoons. Mr Rickuss interjected. 09 Oct 2007 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 3281

Mrs MILLER: Oh, no, Cameron will be out on his backside after the next federal election. In fact, we will give him a truck to take him out. There are many accidents on the Ipswich Motorway involving heavy vehicles. It is not always the truckie’s fault that there are accidents on this motorway because the road itself can be to blame, as can the incredible number of cars and trucks that this road carries. It is important we note today that the Ipswich Motorway absolutely must be upgraded. The alternative northern bypass, which is promoted by the Howard government and the current federal member for Blair, is an absolute joke because it involves failed planning and it involves the expenditure of double the money that it would take to actually widen the Ipswich Motorway. In fact, the Howard government is looking backwards not forwards, which is typical of a government being led by such a very old man. I would like to call on Howard to drop this stupid notion of a Goodna bypass and get on with widening the Ipswich Motorway because that is what we want to happen in our electorate. Combined with this legislation and the widening of the motorway, maybe the residents of Ipswich will have safer roads to travel on. I would also like to talk about heavy vehicles on council roads, because we have had quite a number of heavy vehicles on the Redbank Plains Road over the last few months. I am very pleased that a meeting with the police, Main Roads and the council saw the speed limit along the Redbank Plains Road reduced to make the road safer for all road users. This was mainly due to the number of heavy vehicles using this road, and the increase in the number of vehicles has been because of the increased development in the area around Redbank Plains and Augustine Heights and because of the upgrade of School Road. Working together, I think we have been able to make the area much safer for heavy vehicle drivers as well as car drivers. It is also important that we never forget that road safety should be an absolute priority in our areas no matter what. I would like to congratulate our new minister for transport for taking on this role. It is a very challenging role in transport. I would also like to thank the officers of the department who have been working on this legislation and I commend the bill to the House. Mr WETTENHALL (Barron River—ALP) (5.18 pm): I rise to speak in support of the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill and to speak principally on the taxi and limousine provisions of the bill which are going to have great benefits in the Cairns area. But before I comment on those, I will make a couple of observations about the heavy vehicle provisions. As has been said by other members in this debate, the amount of freight that is going to be carried on our roads by heavy vehicles over the next decades is expected to increase very significantly. I am very pleased that this bill creates a modern, flexible and adaptable framework for the regulation of that industry and for provisions that will ensure compliance with the road safety provisions. That is going to have a very important and direct impact on areas right throughout the state. It is a very important provision of the bill. Most specifically of interest to people in Cairns will be the provisions that will allow peak demand taxi services to be adopted. In Cairns there have been a number of major events over the past two or three years where patrons of those events have experienced difficulty in obtaining taxis. That has caused significant problems for the event managers but also for the police and for existing taxi operators in dispersing those crowds. It has become something of a problem. I hope that the new provisions that allow for service contractors to place extra services at those major events and at peak times will be investigated and analysed thoroughly by those contractors and, should the commercial conditions exist, that they will take up the opportunities that are provided by this legislation to provide those peak services. If that is the case, not only will it enable patrons of those events to get home quicker and safer but also it will certainly be of benefit to the event managers, the police and other bodies and authorities who, at present, are faced with the difficult task of managing large numbers of people who attend major events—sometimes for most of the day—and who are eager to either get home or move on to the next part of the day’s activities and are having difficulty doing so. So the provisions do enable contractors to provide services in a flexible and adaptable way for those events. There are also provisions in the bill that enable special purpose limousine licences to be issued for special events such as weddings, school formals and events of that nature. As everyone knows, Cairns is a fantastic place to live, it is a fantastic place to visit and it is a great place to get married. I got married in Cairns and I am very proud to say that. Let there be more marriages in Cairns. One of the terrific things that people can do when they come to a place like Cairns is hop into one of those magnificent old vehicles that are now going to be able to be operated legally under the provisions of this bill. That is going to be another drawcard for visitors who come to Cairns not only to experience our magnificent reefs and rainforests but also to tie the knot and to mark that most special of occasions in a special vehicle. That is a terrific innovation. It is a recognition of the fact that there is a demand for those services and it provides a legal framework for the development of those services. Also of particular benefit to Cairns will be the introduction of the regional limousine licences. It is very interesting to note that already there has been a significant uptake of those licences. In the far- north Queensland regional limousine service area there have been 14 of those. There is a significant demand for them. They provide an important adjunct to the provision of the standard taxi services. They are popular. They are well used, and the framework that is established under the bill will enable the development of that component of the industry in an orderly way and is to be highly commended. 3282 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 09 Oct 2007

Also of importance in the bill is the new penalty provisions that will apply in the event that contractors are in breach of their service conditions. The previous penalty provisions were quite obviously too low to be an effective deterrent. Whilst I am not aware of any defects in the contractors’ provisions in the Cairns area, certainly it is going to be an incentive for operators to comply with their service conditions. That is going to enhance public confidence in the efficiency of the services that are provided and will enhance the efficiency of the services provided themselves. That is a very welcome addition in the provisions of the bill. In summary, these provisions really are going to improve the level of service for patrons of the taxi and limousine and special limousine services throughout the state. I think that they will be of particular benefit to the people of Cairns. I am very happy to rise to speak in support of the bill. Mrs STUCKEY (Currumbin—Lib) (5.26 pm): I rise to contribute to the debate on the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 2007. As was ably demonstrated by the shadow minister, the honourable member for Clayfield, the coalition will be supporting this bill, albeit with some reservations. The bill aims to amend six pieces of legislation: the Maritime and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2006, the Transport Infrastructure Act 1994, the Transport Operations (Marine Pollution) Act 1995, the Transport Operations (Passenger Transport) Act 1994, the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995 and the Transport Planning and Coordination Act 1994. However, in the time I have allocated to me I intend to focus solely on the amendments made to the Transport Operations (Passenger Transport) Act as it is an important issue for not only taxi and limousine businesses but also residents of and tourists visiting the Gold Coast. I would like to recognise the minister in the House and congratulate him on his new portfolio. These specific amendments propose to introduce peak demand taxi—or PDT—permits in order to increase the number of taxis available during peak times, to increase the penalties for passenger transport contract holders who fail to meet key requirements of their service contract and to introduce special purpose limousine service licences for weddings, school formals and tourist services. There is also included an amendment that will require limousine operators to use a passenger booking and recording system which is to be electronic and impose penalties for noncompliance. Interestingly, as has already been raised by my colleague the honourable member for Clayfield, there is not a readily available device to meet proposed section 87B of this bill. From consultations I have had with representatives from the limousine industry on the Gold Coast, it has been indicated to me that these amendments will have a detrimental effect and will be a severe imposition on limousine operators right throughout Queensland. Industry operators have advised that the electronic booking system was unworkable for both financial and practical reasons. Unfortunately, the government has failed to undertake appropriate consultation with the industry and has ignored the specific practical operational requirements relevant to the industry. It does seem that the government and Queensland Transport are leaning in favour of the taxi industry at the expense of limousine operators, in particular through the introduction of passenger booking and recording systems aimed at restricting the amount of business the limousine operator can carry out. The reasoning behind such an amendment is apparently due to complaints made by the taxi industry to Queensland Transport. The complaints have alleged certain limousine operators have been taking advantage of the lack of taxis available to the public during peak periods, in particular Friday and Saturday nights and special events such as the Melbourne Cup, the Magic Millions and the Indy. When introducing the bill the former transport minister stated that it ‘will prevent unscrupulous limousine drivers cruising the streets for business or standing illegally for hire’. Furthermore, regular complaints about this unfair and illegal activity are also received from the taxi industry, which has much higher entry and operating costs. It is my belief that further consultation with the limousine industry by this Labor government is warranted in order to determine the availability and practicability of these booking devices. There is a solid argument supporting the fact that the implementation of an electronic booking instrument is an unnecessary cost burden on a small business industry. I have personally met with the Limousine Association Queensland and I empathise with its position. With respect to the issue of touting, I am informed that only seven per cent of all limousine operators are involved in such transactions, most of which occur on the Gold Coast. Of the seven per cent, 93 per cent were made to pay for their illegal behaviour, and so they should. Touting has flourished on the Gold Coast for over a decade due to the inaction of Queensland Transport in approving a greater number of taxi licences in the most demanding area for taxi services in Queensland. The price of a taxi licence on the Gold Coast is over and above the cost associated with obtaining a licence in Brisbane or other areas throughout Queensland. There are approximately 430 cabs on the Gold Coast, the licences for which cost around $580,000. These exorbitantly expensive fees make it virtually impossible for taxidrivers and companies to make a solid return, given the average return for each taxi is only around $60,000 per annum. This does not make it worthwhile for taxi companies to purchase further licences as it would take around nine years for each taxi to recoup the money spent on purchasing the initial licence. This is one argument that has been put forward by these operators. 09 Oct 2007 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 3283

In turn, this has resulted in a limited number of taxidrivers on the road on the Gold Coast. The honourable member for Robina estimated that the Gold Coast actually needs around 800 cabs, which is almost twice the number we currently have. It is no wonder there is this level of frustration. It is extraordinary that this has been allowed to happen when one considers both the extensive tourism industry, which draws literally millions of visitors to the Gold Coast, and the busy nightlife the Gold Coast enjoys. But then again it is typical of the short-sighted attitude of the Labor government and the way it continues to treat the Gold Coast like a poor second cousin. A shortage of vehicles has brought forward numerous complaints from residents and visitors alike about the current poor service standards from our local transport providers. I have been made to wait for a taxi for hours on end at my home on a Friday or Saturday evening despite making a booking earlier in the day. During peak periods late at night on weekends and especially in the suburbs, you may as well give up on calling for a taxi because unless a cab is in the area there is little chance there will be one around to collect you as there are not enough taxis available due to the lack of licences approved on the Gold Coast. Taxi scarcity also occurs at shift changeover times. The limited number of taxis also limits the number of drivers, many of whom work long hours during peak periods. Most full-time drivers work five or six 12-hour shifts to ensure that they make ends meet. I would like to take this opportunity to say I have a lot of respect for our taxidrivers in whose hands many of us place our personal safety on frequent occasions. How these drivers can function properly during continual long, late night shifts is often a cause for concern. It is imperative for everyone in the House to be cognisant of the need to ensure the safety and wellbeing of passengers and also drivers through the fatigue management of drivers as well as random drug testing. A surprisingly high number of limousines, around 200 of them, operate on the Gold Coast. In part this has resulted from unmet demand, as I have already highlighted, but is also due to our image as a holiday and fun destination. The small number of taxi licences being granted on the Gold Coast has generated further social implications as our population rapidly grows. Hopefully, the introduction of peak demand taxi permits will go a long way to addressing this problem. In recent years there has been an escalation in violence on taxi ranks and also of violence directed at taxidrivers themselves. It could be suggested that this is a flow-on effect from the limited number of taxis available during peak periods. The government does have to shoulder a large percentage of the responsibility here. At times hundreds of intoxicated members of the public spill out from clubs and congregate in the one location, all looking for a taxi to get home. It is essential that taxi operations are run more effectively and efficiently. It was reported in the Courier-Mail on 1 May this year— Two groups of men met and clashed with fatal consequences ... Moody’s group jumped into the first taxi that came along to protest from those ahead of them. The President of the Taxi Council of Queensland, Max McBride, stated in the Courier-Mail on 2 May— He would discuss legislative changes ... our focus has been on getting more cabs into the system. I do support the introduction of the peak demand management plans, as stated, to allow extra taxis to be provided during peak periods and managed by the taxi companies. However, this is just one part of the solution to a long-term problem. Certainly the amendment has the potential to ease the pressure on taxi services on the Gold Coast, but more needs to be done to ensure that the people of the Gold Coast are better serviced. This can ultimately be achieved by reducing the costs associated with purchasing a taxi licence on the Gold Coast and bringing it into line with the cost of licences in other areas of Queensland—for example, Brisbane. In addition, I have been asked by the limousine industry to urge this government to listen to the concerns raised by them and to reconsider the requirement for electronic booking system devices to be fitted to all non-special purpose limousines. Limited public transport services throughout our suburbs, those that are not aligned with key roads such as the Gold Coast Highway, mean that we on the Gold Coast rely very heavily on taxis and limousines to enjoy our social lives. Whilst it is essential to regulate these important service providers, governments must also allow them to operate in a harmonious and fair manner. I commend the bill to the House. Ms CROFT (Broadwater—ALP) (5.36 pm): I rise to support the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 2007. I am particularly interested in the reforms to the limousine industry contained in this omnibus bill. The amendments contained in the bill introduce several critical reforms to improve service delivery in the limousine industry. These amendments will create a new category of limousine, special purpose limousines, and will require general purpose limousine operators to maintain electronic records of bookings. These changes are a significant step aimed at achieving a customer-responsive service that meets the community needs in a changing marketplace. Included in these amendments are the changes to enable greater flexibility for operators, recognising the special nature of some of their services. Whole of Queensland limousine licences currently cost $130,000, and the availability of licences across Queensland is carefully controlled to ensure the security of the investment made by operators. However, there is a small part of the industry that does not want to provide conventional limousine 3284 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 09 Oct 2007 services. These operators usually have one or two privately owned classic vehicles. For example, a 1927 Model A Ford or 1930s Hupmobile. Often the expensive purchases and the cost of maintaining these vehicles means the operators themselves place limits on the type of work they do. They are usually reserved for specific purposes such as weddings and school formals. These limits place obvious restrictions on the return operators can generate and rule out the conventional limousine licence as the cost cannot be recovered. Queensland Transport is aware of instances where vehicles have been used to provide chauffeur driven services for a fee. This activity is illegal as these services would only be provided by an appropriately licensed and accredited vehicle. This illegal behaviour does not provide a sufficient safeguard for the travelling public. The service provider does not have the appropriate insurance, and consequently these types of services do not provide any form of safety net for the customer in the case of an accident nor does the driver meet a minimum level of competence and accreditation. Exposing the travelling public to this level of risk is clearly unacceptable. That said, the government does recognise that there is a middle ground to enable those types of operations. This bill creates a special purpose licence—the SPL licence—which is a new category of limousine licence. SPLs will provide a service especially for weddings, formals and tourist services. Vehicles will have a minimum age of 30 years, clearly distinguishing them from conventional commercial limousine operators. Licences will be leased on an annual basis for a set fee of $2,000, and SPLs will provide the public with a greater choice of vehicle options for those very special occasions. In addition, it allows owners of special unique and older vehicles to enter a market previously not available to them. Once the changes to the legislation are implemented, special purpose licence limousines will provide Queensland customers with the confidence that the vehicle and the services meet a minimum required performance standard while also having the opportunity to share in the experience of these classic cars. The bill also addresses another issue in the limousine industry—touting and plying for hire. This practice has seen some limousine operators engaging in unfair practices in direct competition with the taxi industry. This is unfair because limousine operators do not pay the same price for licences as taxi operators. This practice also directly conflicts with how these two industries are intended to operate. Limousines are required to operate under a prebooking arrangement and can only stand in approved locations waiting for work. Most of these limousine ranks operate on the Gold Coast. This bill will make it a requirement for limousine operators to have an electronic recording as evidence of prebooking for services. Present limousine service licence conditions do not require limousine operators to keep a record of a prior booking. While limousine operators must only provide services to customers who have prebooked their journey, it is currently difficult to determine if a prebooking exists. This anomaly has enabled unscrupulous operators to ply for hire—that is, approach customers directly offering transport services. This reform will require limousine operators when not at an approved rank to record prebookings for services on an electronic passenger booking recording system. This system will allow departmental officers to quickly confirm the existence of a prior booking and enable more effective compliance with the regulations governing the operation of limousine services. This initiative will reduce the instances of limousine drivers and operators acting illegally by making it easier for Queensland Transport inspectors to detect when illegal activity has occurred. This reform will improve the integrity of the limousine service in Queensland. It is worth noting that the requirement for an electronic passenger recording system does not apply to SPL licences. For these licences, either paper or electronic booking recording systems are considered appropriate. This option recognises the part-time nature of SPLs. This bill will provide the basis for implementing new improved limousine services across Queensland. I welcome the introduction of the taxi and limousine reform package of initiatives delivered by this bill, and I commend the bill to the House. Mr FOLEY (Maryborough—Ind) (5.42 pm): I rise to participate in the debate on the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill. Let me say at the outset that my life has been somewhat enriched since learning two new acronyms—TORUM and MARPOL. I had absolutely no idea what they meant before I looked at the bill, but that has been an enriching and enlightening experience. Mr Hinchliffe interjected. Mr FOLEY: Yes, that is right; it will improve my French. I take that interjection from the honourable member. With regard to crash statistics in Queensland—and I want to particularly touch on heavy vehicles in my contribution to this debate—in his second reading speech Minister Lucas said— Crash statistics in Queensland highlight the potential hazard heavy vehicles can pose when not managed properly. In 2006, heavy vehicles, including rigid trucks, articulated trucks, road trains and B-doubles were involved in 53 fatal crashes resulting in 54 fatalities. He goes on to say— This represents 16 per cent of the Queensland road toll and is six fatalities or 12.5 per cent higher than 2005 and 13 per cent higher than the previous five-year average. 09 Oct 2007 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 3285

I am concerned for the reputation of truck drivers in this regard, because does that mean that we can assume that with that vast representation in the fatality statistics those accidents were all the fault of the truck drivers? We have all read in the newspapers the horror truck drivers face if someone decides to sadly end it all and pull into the path of an oncoming truck. Many times I have had truck drivers in my office complaining about the idiotic nature of drivers and the risks they take getting around trucks and slow-moving vehicles like caravans et cetera, and I talked about that this morning during the MPI debate. I said that one thing that would be a vast improvement is to see video cameras mounted in trucks in order to capture some of the stupid behaviour we are talking about. I am very concerned that truck drivers’ reputations are being besmirched here. Whilst it is true that trucks have been involved in those fatal accidents, I would certainly not like to draw the conclusion that all the fault is with the heavy vehicle drivers. Having said that of course, if there was one job in the whole state I would not like to do it is being a long distance truck driver. I find it tiring enough driving from Maryborough to Brisbane. I have no idea how truck drivers can drive and drive and drive and deal with fatigue and stupidness on the road, road rage et cetera. I take my hat off to them. They do an incredible job, but they also need facilities. We are urging truck drivers all of the time to take their rest breaks and so forth, but I receive a constant stream of complaints from truck drivers who say that there are not the rest areas and there are not the facilities there to be able to properly rest and reduce that risk. The member for Gladstone touched on this when she said that it is not feasible of course for every pull-over area to have hot and cold showers, barbecues and everything else. It is—and I am sure all members of this House would agree—a real and significant problem. We have to get somewhere between having a laissez-faire attitude about the whole instance and providing facilities in a framework where truck drivers can rest up. One of Minister Lucas’s statements in his second reading speech will have to go down as one of the great understatements of the world when he said— In addition to these growth predictions, members will appreciate that should a truck collide with a car, the greater relative mass of the truck will result in higher impact forces and cause a lot more damage. That is an incredible understatement in terms of fatalities involving trucks—and my mirth here is not meant to make light of those factors—because clearly if you are a car driver and you fall asleep and drift into the path of a truck, you will come off second best. It always amazes me that in multiple fatalities involving trucks truck drivers walk away without a scratch. But we must remember that we are talking about projectiles of a very significant weight. When we add speed to that—the combination of weight and speed—they are potentially lethal weapons. We really do need to work very hard—and I am sure this bill is going a long way to doing that—to ensure safety. There are a couple of other points I want to touch on. The taxi and limousine industry is very stable in Maryborough because it takes about five to 10 minutes to drive from one side of town to the other. We do not experience the Gold Coast and Brisbane nightclub type problems that are experienced in capital cities, so I will leave that for members where that is a much greater issue. I was reading the bill’s summary this morning about rendering assistance. I was a little confused about that, but after having spoken to the minister’s policy people I discovered it relates to hit-and-run drivers. Clearly this bill goes a long way to ramping up the pressure on the low-lifes involved in hit-and- run accidents, and I do not use that word lightly, because it is entirely un-Australian for anyone involved in an accident to flee the scene and leave people injured and broken. I understand that an amendment will be moved by the minister during the consideration in detail stage to clause 78 relating to section 62(2A) seeking to increase that statute of limitations period from three to five years. I wholeheartedly say, ‘Hear, hear!’ That is a good outcome. The Travelsafe Committee has considered the issue of recidivist drink drivers and drug drivers very, very extensively. All the members of that committee have been dismayed, have scratched their heads and have asked, ‘What can we do about recidivist drink drivers who say: “Yes, we know we are breaking the law and we couldn’t give a stuff. We don’t care.”?’ These people cause accidents that result in fatalities and people being maimed. We need to come down very hard on them. This bill contains provisions relating to disqualification periods and running them concurrently. I think that is a great thing as well. Recidivist drink driving is well known, but drug driving is a relatively new kid on the block in terms of road safety. I think it is a sleeping giant, or perhaps I should say a sleeping ogre. I think the incidence of drug driving in Queensland, and throughout Australia, is far more widespread. Because we have not had an appropriate testing regime it simply has not been picked up. Now that we have drugs such as ice and other destructive forces, combined with youth they make for a dangerous cocktail to have behind the wheel. I note that the bill states that where a person is disqualified by a court two or more times for driving with drugs or excessive alcohol in their systems, that person should be required to serve out the total of those disqualification periods. I say again on the record that anything that enhances road safety by getting these clowns who continue to flout the law off the road is a good thing. With regard to the written notice on challenging high-speed cameras, the Travelsafe Committee recently had the opportunity to go to police headquarters and to consider some of the rationale of what they do with speed cameras. My only concern is that we are drowning in red tape. In some respects we 3286 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 09 Oct 2007 are certainly struggling to cope with the amount of legislation that regulates us as a society. I do not know what this challenge will do other than make it easier for the prosecution to establish its case. We talk about having expert witnesses, but at the moment I would not regard the manner in which courts deal with matters as either easy or hard, but quite appropriate. So I have some concerns that that amendment means that a person cannot mount a reasonable legal challenge without almost giving the other side a leg-up in terms of the law. I assume that the provisions of the bill that relate to the use of special purpose limousines—and the minister might like to clarify this—applies only when there is a pecuniary interest in the provision of the service. I know that on a lot of occasions at home through deb balls and other significant social occasions—and I readily put up my hand and say that I am an unashamed car fanatic and over the years have driven some different cars—my children and my children’s friends will say, ‘Mr Foley, can you take us to the formal in your sports car?’, or whatever the car might have been at the time. Obviously, if that service is provided for free as an act of goodwill, I would like to think that it would not be caught up in this legislation. In relation to the TORUM Act and the whole concept of the modification of motor vehicles, we have come a long way technologically. I remember that as a very young boy—14 years of age—I started my apprenticeship as a motorcycle mechanic. In those days there was no separate course for that. You did a car mechanic course at college—at Merivale Street, South Brisbane, if my memory serves me correctly. In those days, of course, our favourite thing was to drive Morris Minor panel vans—Morrie vans—with GT Cortina engines in them. These days, instead of what I would regard as the fun things that people used to do, people have these turbo-charged imported vehicles and other vehicles that are hotted up to the eyeballs with twin turbos, blow-off valves and things like that. In this day and age I think we certainly need to have appropriate guidelines for those people who wish to make modifications to their cars. Recently I drove to the Gold Coast to have a look at a vehicle that had been modified. When I looked at the modifications that had been done and the paperwork that was provided by the people who signed off on it, I was absolutely appalled. I wondered if those people should not go to jail for signing off on what had been done. So, clearly, there is a system in place, but I do not think that a tightening up of that system would be a bad thing at all. Finally, I would like to touch on an area that I have raised a number times as a member of the Travelsafe Committee. This bill amends the definition of ‘bicycle’ to exclude specifically vehicles that are fitted with an internal combustion engine. In his second reading speech the minister stated—

This will outlaw the practice of people mounting whipper-snipper motors on ordinary push bikes to help them get around. Mr Rickuss: They can whipper snipper the path at the same time. Mr FOLEY: They can do the lawn edges while they are at it. I must confess that I have never seen a bicycle with a whipper snipper motor on it, but I have seen a number of rather strange looking hybrids around the place. One concern I have raised is the fact that people can ride a scooter—a Vespa or another type of small scooter—with only a car licence. I think that issue really needs to be looked at. People can get in just as much trouble riding a motor scooter as they can riding a motorbike if they are not experienced, or if they are not ready for the car door opening in front of them and all of those sorts of things. I know that issue has precious little to do with the bill, but I just wanted to refer to it. In terms of the type of modifications that can be made to bicycles, if you put a chainsaw motor on a pushbike, you are going to have one noisy little whipper snipper on two wheels. The bill makes minor amendments to the definition of ‘motor vehicle’. It also touches on wheeled toys such as scooters. With the advent of cheap and now much more reliable engineering coming out of China, we are seeing some very, very unusual and hybrid vehicles hitting the road. At the risk of the Wright brothers rolling over in their graves because people are not allowed to express their mechanical inventiveness, I think these amendments should be supported. I want to close my contribution to this debate by referring to clause 39 of the bill—the power to stop private vehicles—which appears on page 42. I echo the concerns that were raised by the member for Gladstone in relation to the particular clause. Those of us who have children work very hard to say to them, ‘If some yahoo wants to stop you on the side of the road, don’t stop; just keep driving.’ When we consider the murder of Peter Falconio and other incidents that have occurred, I wonder about that clause. I would certainly tell my children not to stop in those circumstances even if it was a police officer telling them to stop. There have been instances of kids being stopped by fake police officers, let alone people with no identification saying, ‘Pull over. I want to talk to you.’ I would like the minister to refer to that clause in a little more detail. With those reservations, I commend the bill to the House. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr O’Brien): Order! I probably should have picked you up during your contribution for your comment about not giving a stuff. That is unparliamentary. 09 Oct 2007 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 3287

Mrs MENKENS (Burdekin—NPA) (5.57 pm): Before I speak to this bill, I would like to take the opportunity to acknowledge the appointment of the Premier and the appointment of the new ministers to their various portfolios. I am happy to make a contribution to the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill. As the shadow minister has indicated, the coalition will be supporting this legislation. This bill amends six pieces of transport legislation. This legislation contains amendments that will achieve national compliance and enforcement reforms for heavy vehicles as well as amendments that make significant changes to the taxi and limousine industries. Also included in this bill are amendments to tolling, busway land acquisitions and marine pollution. I acknowledge the fine work done in Queensland by our many transport drivers. Because Queensland is an enormous state, a good transport system is one of its most important requirements for sustainable development, regional development and, basically, to provide decent living standards for the people. Long-distance transport driving is not an easy task. It is stressful, it is dangerous and it requires a great deal of professionalism. I believe that professionalism is exactly what our many truckies bring to the business. The heavy transport industry transports many types of products ranging from minerals to commodities and livestock. One only has to travel the Bruce Highway to see the enormous number of trucks that are on the roads. It is a major tragedy when an accident occurs and, very sadly, in the past week in my electorate two accidents have occurred. I listened with quite a lot of interest to the previous speaker who spoke at length about safety issues and statistics involving truck drivers. I concur with him that, in many instances when accidents occur, the trucks are not the problem. Bearing in mind the number of trucks that are on the roads, accident statistics attest to the professional approach that truck drivers take. The trucking industry has done much to improve the safety of its drivers and to bring credibility to the industry. For instance, TruckSafe is an initiative of the Australian Trucking Association. It is a formal safety accreditation scheme. TruckSafe is a business and risk management system aimed at improving the safety and professionalism of trucking operators across the nation. It is an industry initiative and it delivers competitive advantages to accredited operators. Those who are accredited have the advantage. The scheme also offers security to consumers. Within the TruckSafe scheme, accreditation areas include management, maintenance, workplace and driver health and training. The standards that are outlined are the minimum that a trucking business should meet to be a safe and responsible operation. Credit must be given to the industry for its efforts, particularly in this but also in many other areas. Within the heavy transport industry, the livestock transport industry is an integral and essential part of the Queensland beef and cattle industry. Australia is one of the world’s most efficient producers of cattle and it is the world’s second largest exporter of beef. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics 2005-06 figures, currently Australia produces just over two million tonnes of beef and veal a year. The very interesting thing about that is that Queensland is responsible for 50.9 per cent of the total beef and veal production in Australia. That is more than all the other states put together, and it puts into perspective the importance of the meat and livestock industry to Queensland. Stock carriers play a vital role in the livestock supply chain. Trucks are the main form of transportation from the farm gate to the final point, whether that is the saleyard, an abattoir or a port. Trucks are used because they are more flexible than other transportation methods such as rail. The extensive road network allows a truck to get to the farm gate to collect livestock and transport it to its destination. The livestock trucking industry has a reputation for the careful loading and unloading of stock. It provides smooth transportation during transit to ensure the ultimate care of the livestock. Truckies are well aware of animal welfare issues. Of course, to add to this, careful loading of cattle minimises bruising and injury, which has economic ramifications for the grazier. The health and welfare of livestock is an important consideration for operators and must be addressed throughout the whole of the land transport phase. There are many other factors involved with the transport of livestock as compared to commodity transport. There are many more difficulties with livestock, such as the added responsibilities of yarding and handling the stock, the provision of food and water, changing climatic conditions during the trip, overcrowding and many other aspects. Transporting livestock is no easy task. As well as animal welfare, customer satisfaction is the most important consideration for operators throughout the livestock transport sector. Of course, the state of the roads plays a huge part in that. I note that the beef industry, via the MLA, recognises the importance and value of livestock transport operations through the granting of annual awards to livestock transport operators. I was very pleased to note that the 2006 winner of the livestock transport award was a valued constituent of mine in the Burdekin electorate, Mr Ron Pattel. For many years Ron and his family have run a very broad transport industry that includes a large livestock transport industry. Ron has played a very large part in the organisation of the industry. He is well respected by pastoralists and the industry in general. 3288 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 09 Oct 2007

The amendments in the legislation before the House this evening that affect heavy transport operations adopt provisions from the national Road Transport Reform Bill 2003. The intent of this is to strengthen current heavy vehicle compliance and enforcement processes in Queensland. Because the legislation adopts national provisions, the coalition is very happy to support the bill. The national legislation has been designed to achieve uniformity across Australia and to improve compliance with and enforcement of heavy vehicle operating requirements. The objective of the reforms is to improve the behaviour on the road of those involved in the heavy vehicle transport industry and to ensure accountability of all parties influencing compliance with heavy vehicle transport laws. It is noted that the chain of responsibility reaches past the driver to ensure that all parties involved in on-road behaviour are held accountable. To a certain extent, this takes some of the onus or blame from the driver, and puts added responsibilities and compliance regulations on the owner and the company involved. This chain of responsibility was first introduced in Queensland in 1996. I have met with and listened to concerns from quite a few transport owners in relation to some of these guidelines. Of course, road safety is the ultimate end product and naturally it is not in dispute. At no stage can this be compromised. However, unnecessary imposts on transport owners and operators are not acceptable. This bill strengthens the powers of authorised officers to investigate and prosecute persons for breaches of heavy vehicle mass, dimensions, loading and driver fatigue management requirements. There are several new mass offence categories which involve minor risk breaches where a vehicle is overloaded by less than five per cent, substantial breaches between five per cent and 20 per cent, and severe breaches where the load is 20 per cent or more above the maximum limit. Let us hope that none of those are out there. In relation to an overloaded livestock truck, I note that authorised officers have the power to direct a truck driver to the nearest spelling yard to remove some of the stock before continuing on a journey. While the safety aspects of overloading certainly do come into question, this process could give rise to some difficult situations. Of course, stock comes in all shapes, sizes and weights. I imagine that this must make it difficult for drivers to gauge the actual weight of their loads. We should bear in mind that the majority of stock is loaded at properties at the back of beyond where they do not have adequate scales. I have no doubt that at times truck drivers could have problems gauging the weight of stock. Other problems could arise with the imposed unloading of cattle in transit. For example, cattle from a non-tick free area may be unloaded in a tick-free area. The logistics associated with a driver on a tight schedule having to unload stock and find adequate food and water where there may be none raises another set of questions. Powers have been given to authorised officers to enter and search heavy vehicles and specified heavy vehicles without a warrant. There is no doubt a lot of common sense in this provision, as the bureaucracy and time wasted in getting a warrant would negate the search. However, it is hoped that these powers are not misused. In relation to some of the other issues raised in this bill, I understand that there is quite a deal of concern being expressed by some owners and operators of limousines. Under this legislation, limousine owners will be required to maintain a passenger booking system to prevent dishonest operators either standing unlawfully for hire or cruising the streets for hire. The passenger booking system will need to be proven to have been in place before a booking is made. This raises the questions as to what type of booking system will be used, what sort of technology is available or affordable to actually do this and what the economic ramifications of this will be on limousine operators. Many limousine owners are small operators who run on very small margins and excess costs will ultimately have to be passed on to the consumer if the operators are going to survive. It is imperative that the department allows time for limousine operators to actually install this system and that the department allows sufficient leeway for them to comply before transgressions are actually prosecuted. Taxi licences are certainly a valuable asset and their value is kept intact by the issuing of limited numbers. However, waiting for taxis at peak times can be appalling. Trying to get a taxi to the airport on Friday afternoon can be fraught with major difficulty as it is trying to get a taxi at peak times, on weekend nights, on rainy days and, of course, for special events. Bearing in mind that the use of taxis is becoming imperative with RBT laws, this is an issue that certainly does need to be addressed. It can be positively dangerous for people to be waiting for a cab in isolated areas. I do note the peak demand management plans that are espoused in this legislation. These amendments propose an environment in which the taxi industry can actually meet peak demand through the introduction of annual peak demand management plans. They also allow for peak demand taxi permits which can be bought. I am certainly pleased to see that there are avenues being looked at to address this issue. A process whereby limousine owners could actually be utilised during peak times is an issue that I believe could be looked into as well. There are quite a few areas within this bill, but to this extent I commend the bill to the House. 09 Oct 2007 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 3289

Mr HORAN (Toowoomba South—NPA) (6.13 pm): The Transport Legislation Amendment Bill covers some six bills and many of the issues that are dealt with are very, very important. My electorate of Toowoomba South and the Toowoomba and Darling Downs area generally is a huge trucking centre. There are some very large major companies in Toowoomba like Simons Transport, Neil Mansell and Wagners with its aggregate trucks and concrete trucks. The nearby towns of Pittsworth and Oakey are also very, very big transport centres. The main road through Toowoomba—James Street or the Warrego Highway—is one of the heaviest freight-carrying roads in Australia. Whilst I do not have the latest figures, somewhere in the order of 3,500 to 4,500 semitrailers—mostly B-doubles—go through the main east-west street of Toowoomba every day. They are heading from south-east Queensland, through Toowoomba and then they either turn right and go to Darwin or turn left and go down through central New South Wales to the southern states to Melbourne, Adelaide and Western Australia. Traversing the city they go through 16 sets of traffic lights. It is a major issue in our city. You can stand at any set of traffic lights at nearly any time of the day and see about half a dozen B-doubles at either side, east and west, at those lights. It is the main east-west street of our city. As not only the volume of traffic but the weight of traffic continues to grow, it makes the social amenity of the main east-west street of the city very difficult for people. Many people would normally use that road, particularly mothers, to take their kids to schools like St Xavier’s, St Joseph’s, St Mary’s, Harristown State High School, Concordia, Glennie, St Ursula’s—all the schools in that particular area. It really makes it very difficult for people to go east and west. For that reason the second range crossing, or the Toowoomba bypass, has become essential. Some years ago the federal government put forward the money to purchase the corridor. That has been done. The money is there now for the final detailed planning which is underway, and I believe the test drilling of the tunnel is almost complete. Once this road is put in place it will have about three lanes either side, two of which will be operable and the third one will be a spare for pipelines and communication lines and so forth. The benefit of a second range crossing will do is twofold: firstly, there will be a dramatic change to Toowoomba by taking thousands and thousands of heavily laden trucks out of our city trying to traverse through 16 sets of traffic lights; and, secondly, the number near incidents and crashes that occur will decrease, particularly on the range where literally hundreds of incidents have occurred in recent years resulting in deaths, injuries and major dislocation to the extent that the city is virtually cut off. The second range crossing is essential. I think it is the most important road in Australia that needs to be built. However, I do understand the importance of upgrading the very strategic Pacific Highway in the north of our state with the floods that occur. But when one looks at the sheer volume of traffic going through one of the biggest, if not the biggest, inland cities in Australia other than Canberra, it is no longer tolerable to have that volume of trucks going through the main east-west road of our city. For the transport industry, using the second range crossing will take at least three-quarters of an hour off the travel time. They will be able to cross the range at 80 kilometres an hour. The cost of running a B-double is somewhere in the order of $100 an hour these days, so there is a very significant saving in time and money. The proposal that is being looked at is a possible business case for a public- private partnership for that road. It does seem a shame to me that ring-roads are built around Melbourne and Sydney and four- lane and eight-lane highways from Brisbane to the Gold Coast and to the Sunshine Coast, but because we are a regional city we are looking at a public-private partnership to build this road because of the sheer cost. This is one of the most important pieces of road infrastructure for the transport industry of Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, Western Australia and the Northern Territory—for the nation. Toowoomba itself deserves to have this bypass road so that we can have a reasonable social amenity within our city. I look forward to announcements by the federal government to put forward the money. We have been asking for it for many, many years. A substantial amount now has gone into the planning, the purchase of the corridor and the drilling, which, as I have said, has been undertaken. There are a couple of issues in this bill that are important, and I understand that they have been addressed. One is the issue of volumetric loading and the other one is the issue of mass loading. These are very important measures in Queensland. They were brought in by my colleague the former minister for transport and member for Gregory and have been continued. Queensland is the envy of other states because these measures are so sensible and practical. Speaking as the shadow minister for primary industries, I think volumetric loading is important. If a person has four decks of cattle—whether they are steers, bullocks or cows with varying weight; whether there are 26, 24 or 22 per deck depending on their size—they are allowed to have a full load. The mass loading arrangements mean a 7½ per cent tolerance. If you have a semitipper registered for farm use and you do not have scales on the farm, you are out on the paddock or getting the grain from a chaser bin or a header, then you are able to cart that out and have that sensible and practical tolerance. I think it is good to see that maintained and also the four-hour concession for 3290 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 09 Oct 2007 livestock operators, because they often have to stop to check cattle depending on the load. It might be drought stricken cows and they need to check the load regularly. They have to stop and make adjustments to the load to get a cow upright which might be down. All of those issues mean that they could be delayed and that is a sensible provision to have maintained in the bill. An issue brought up in the bill is the chain of responsibility. As far as the trucking industry goes, I think it is a good thing because it makes people responsible, particularly those at the end such as the consignor and the ones who are sending the particular load. If it is vegetables coming out of the Lockyer and the truck leaves in the afternoon and has to be at the Sydney markets by eight the next morning and if there is a time where loading is arranged and that is delayed, that puts the truck driver and the truck company under enormous pressure because, if they are not at the markets by a certain time, it is not considered fresh and it may not meet the quality arrangements and so forth. Therefore, they are often in a position where they have to try to get there in a reduced period of time. Likewise with people loading cattle, if the cattle are not ready or if the yards are not of sufficient capacity or standard, then hold-ups occur. This bill amends the Transport Operations (Passenger Transport) Act, particularly relating to taxis and limousines. There is an issue which I recently wrote to the minister about, and I want to raise this particular matter because it relates to this act. I think many members of the House would be interested in this because it would affect their electorates. The issue relates to the Harley Owners Group, which runs a ‘Cruise for Cancer’ and has raised over $100,000 over the last five years. A similar ride occurs in many electorates. In Toowoomba this year the ride went from Toowoomba down to Queen Mary Falls near Killarney. The money charged for people to go on the bike was collected by Rotary. There was a picnic lunch, and people paid for the pleasure and privilege of going on the bike. There are many other events around the state—things such as outback getaways and other rides that are in place. The issue here is that the group which runs this ride has done so for many years and it runs it very well. Some of the meals are provided by TAFE. Suncorp provides sponsorship. The Queensland Police Service provides supervision because it can cover up to three to five kilometres of bikes along the highway. It sounds like a squadron of Lincoln bombers approaching when you hear the pulsating roar of the Harleys. The provision of motorcycle rides to the general public in return for payment of a fee, the department says, is regarded as a motorcycle tourist service. This is not really a tourist service; it is a fundraising event. They have blanket drives and those sorts of things as well. There are a number of exemptions that would allow a charity ride such as this to be exempted from the need to have an operator accreditation and driver authorisation of all of the drivers. This particular group, HOG, meet most of the exemptions: that the ride not be held on a regular basis; that it is attached to a fundraising charitable event—they get a tick there—and that the ride must not be established as a commercial enterprise—in other words, proceeds go to a charitable organisation, and they get a tick there. Where they do not get an exemption is that the ride must be of short duration, that is, no longer than 15 minutes. That is the problem. I would presume this would apply to Rotary and its outback getaways and maybe the ‘Big Bash’ charity bashes held to raise money and so forth. The penalties are up to $12,000 for operators and $7,500 for each driver. The department was kind enough to allow an exemption this year because the ride was about to take place. The reason it came up was that they never knew about this; they never bothered to apply. When they did apply, suddenly all these issues are there. The real issue is that no- one in the department seemed to have the ability to provide an exemption. Certainly in Toowoomba there was not the devolution of responsibility to provide the exemption. But there was also this issue of one of the four rules which they could not get an exemption for—that is, the ride being longer than 15 minutes. I have written to the minister about this issue. I am sure the minister understands the good intent behind this. There is no way that they are trying to transgress anybody’s tourism service. They are one-off events and if the minister could address that, which I am sure he will, that would be excellent. The other thing I wanted to speak about tonight in the time left is the issue of taxidrivers. To go back to another point, the provision of a plate for heritage vehicles over 30 years is a good provision. They are quite a unique part of special occasions, particularly school formals and weddings. With regard to taxis, I have checked with some of the people involved in the taxi industry in Toowoomba. The service level is still above 85 per cent, which I understand is an acceptable level. It is mainly in places like Brisbane and the Gold Coast where there seems to be such huge demand. The demand, I understand, from talking to people in the taxi industry in Brisbane is huge. People in the taxi industry themselves say that there is a need for additional vehicles. I want to turn to the Gold Coast and the stories I have heard from there. The Gold Coast is a city that is heavily reliant on tourism. There is nothing more offputting for tourists or for young people who want to go out to nightlife than having to queue for cabs. At two o’clock or three o’clock in the morning people do not want to have to queue for cabs. A couple of years back I was in Melbourne with my wife, and we had the pleasure of going to the Derby on Saturday. That Saturday night the Wallabies played the Irish in a game, and there were some celebrations afterwards. At the appropriate time we left and walked out to the cab rank. The queue at the city cab rank which is near the casino must have been 09 Oct 2007 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 3291 about three or four kilometres long. I said to my wife, ‘I am not waiting here; I’ve had this.’ We were staying at a motel some few kilometres out of town, so we walked. But two hours later I said, ‘I have had enough,’ and I was about to lie down on a park bench when we struck a cab coming along the road. But my impression of Melbourne was spoilt by that. If a city promotes itself and advertises itself for events, then there should be ways home. In Melbourne at 12 o’clock at night—or it might have been earlier—all the public transport stopped. They had brought in the innovation of matches—whether it was Australian Rules, Rugby or the odd State of Origin match—at night. They start at about eight at night and go to about 10. By the time you go somewhere and have a cup of tea, before you know it the public transport has stopped and there is no way of getting home. We are heavily promoting the Gold Coast and Brisbane as safe cities. For Brisbane, in particular, young people come from Toowoomba to work or to go to university. They like the city because it is safe. Like our home city of Toowoomba, it is a good, relatively safe city. For a city to be safe, there have to be cabs at night for young people, particularly for young girls. Some of the things that have been brought in are good, such as security at cab ranks and having substitute taxis which the companies can bring on stream at times. But we still have a real shortage. For a place like the Gold Coast, which is one of the great tourist destinations of the world, there must be enough cabs because that is an essential part of a tourism service. Other speakers have spoken about the limousine service and some of the difficulties with electronic bookings and passenger systems. Whilst we support this bill, there have been some reservations about the practicality of that. That is my contribution. I thank the minister for listening to that issue in particular about charity rides. Sitting suspended from 6.30 pm to 7.30 pm. Ms STONE (Springwood—ALP) (7.30 pm): It is with pleasure that I rise to speak briefly tonight on the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 2007, firstly on the adoption of national compliance and enforcement reforms for heavy vehicles. The reforms are designed to improve compliance with, and enforcement of, heavy vehicle operating requirements by adopting the third reform package developed by the National Transport Commission. One very important aim of these reforms is to improve road safety. Research shows that heavy vehicles are overrepresented in crashes causing fatalities. In a state as large as Queensland and in a country like Australia, road transport will continue to play a dominant role in freight movement. So it is therefore extremely important that we have responsible legislation to ensure road safety and better occupational workplace health and safety to continue the viability of the industry. Some of the reforms include provisions that are aimed at ensuring that all parties within the chain of responsibility who influence the behaviour of drivers are held accountable for breaches of road transport laws. It is important to know that Queensland has led the way with regard to the chain of responsibility legislation. Since the introduction of these laws, there has been a drop in the number of heavy vehicle crashes causing fatalities and I hope that this continues. It should also be noted that Queensland has seen some high-profile successful prosecutions in recent times. This can only be a good thing for the industry as it weeds out those not having the respect for their drivers’ safety, for public safety or for competitive equity. Industry equity will also be improved with the new mass, dimension and loading requirements being adopted consistently across the nation. The bill incorporates a risk based class of offences covering the areas of mass, dimension and load restraint with penalties in proportion to the risk to public safety. The bill will also expand on existing chain of responsibility provisions with regard to providing false or misleading information. The bill will also introduce new sanctions such as the commercial benefits penalty. This is a penalty to deter financial incentives to commit breaches of heavy vehicle laws in relation to high-value cargoes. The industry wants to know that it is playing on an even playing field with the necessary penalties that will deter those cowboys in its industry from doing the wrong thing. The public wants legislation that also has the necessary penalties to deter those doing the wrong thing in the industry. It wants to see legislation that will make our roads safer. This is extremely important legislation to all of us. I welcome any initiative that improves road safety and, in particular, improves road safety in relation to the heavy vehicle industry. Secondly, I speak with regard to the amendments that aim to improve the taxi and limousine industries to enhance the range of services available in Queensland. There is no doubt that when we talk to taxi users a consistent complaint is the long queues and waiting times, especially on Friday and Saturday nights and also during major events. For my constituents it is even more relevant when we consider that we do not have access to the special buses for footy games or other major sporting events; we have to drive up to Brisbane to access these special buses. I want to bring to the notice of the new minister, who is in the House tonight, that I think the Springwood bus station and the Logan Hyperdome bus station are two ideal locations that could have special sporting event buses running, and I encourage him to investigate this matter. 3292 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 09 Oct 2007

This bill will provide for peak demand taxis. These extra taxis will be managed through taxi companies to reduce waiting times and alleviate the pressure that can build up due to long queues and wait times at cab ranks during peak times. Flexibility is the key to meeting the challenges of peak demand services, and this bill provides that flexibility. Indy and Magic Millions on the Gold Coast are certainly events that come to mind where this extra service will be very useful. My only concern with this is the difficulty in obtaining drivers. Just like other industries around the state and, indeed, the country, securing staff can be a challenge for many employers, and I believe the taxi industry is no different. While this may be a challenge, I would hope that the taxi industry will ensure adequate training is given to drivers. Having confidence in a taxidriver is very important to taxi users. Having confidence in them to drive safely is extremely important. Taxi customers, especially tourists, want to have the confidence that drivers have the knowledge of the city or regional areas and that they know major tourist destinations. As the member for Toowoomba South said earlier, often that first point of contact for visitors to our state or country is with taxidrivers. When we do have a bad experience with the taxidriver, it certainly does leave a lasting impression on us and what we think about that city or that destination. We must ensure it is a good experience. I would encourage the taxi industry to make sure that the standard of training is kept to a high level. I also ask for assurance that there will be a high standard for the appropriateness of the driver. I know that many young women are concerned for their personal safety. But it is not just waiting at cab ranks at night; they are also concerned about who the driver actually is when they hop into a cab by themselves late at night. I do ask that we keep this quality high on their list when they are recruiting taxidrivers. They should know that selecting drivers who are appropriate to the position is very important to their users. While I can see a great benefit from this new taxi permit, I can also see some difficulties that may occur. However, I am sure this can be worked through by the industry. I believe this new permit is necessary to give the industry the flexibility it needs to meet those peak demands. I turn now to a new category of limousine services and provision for a greater choice of vehicles that can be used for weddings, school formals, graduation ceremonies and a whole other range of social events as well as tourist services. When I talk with students preparing for their school formal they often raise with me the type of car they are going to be arriving in. For them it is part of the overall experience. For some it is a very important part of the overall experience. Choosing a car for a school formal or a wedding is a very exciting time in their life. It is such an exciting and important time that they are not thinking about whether the driver has the appropriate skills or whether the car meets a certain maintenance safety standard. So it is important we do have safeguards in place. I can see how those limousine drivers who obtain appropriate insurance, maintain their vehicle and ensure other operational costs are paid in a legitimate business would be at such a disadvantage if privately owned prestige vehicles or owners of novelty vehicles were to take on the role of chauffeur and charge fees. So I am pleased to see that the bill before the House addresses both the safety of special purpose limousines and the inequities that currently exist in the industry. I want to thank the Taxi Council and the taxi and limousine drivers in my area for keeping me up to date with issues in their industry and for working cooperatively with the government to improve the taxi industry for owners, drivers and customers. I want to congratulate the former minister, the now Deputy Premier, for bringing the bill forward. Transport plays a key role in my electorate. Being halfway between Brisbane and the Gold Coast, Springwood is a rapidly growing area and so transport is very significant to my constituents. I am looking forward to working with the new minister to keep improving transport services for the people of Springwood. I commend the bill to the House. Mr RICKUSS (Lockyer—NPA) (7.36 pm): I rise to speak on the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 2007. There is not much to say that has not already been said on the bill. However, there are a few things I would like to cover. Part of it is about how the heavy vehicle industry has been reforming and is trying to move into the road safety area. Some of the stats quoted by the minister in his second reading speech, although probably correct, can be classed as a little misleading. I rang a couple of local transport operators in my area. The average local transport operators are doing 80,000 to 100,000 kilometres per year. The interstate vehicles that they run probably do 240,000 to 250,000 kilometres per year. At a minimum, that is probably five times as much as the standard person is doing in their operations. The interstate boys are probably doing 10 times as much. If we take that into account per kilometre of road usage, the stats do not look quite as bad as they first appear. No-one wants to see deaths on the road. No-one wants to see the cowboys in the industry, who are a real problem. Unfortunately, there are drivers who have been driving for too long. I do urge the minister to look at putting in place more truck stops. There is one on the Warrego Highway in the Lockyer electorate. It is a well-utilised truck stop. It is full every night. It has solar toilets and all that sort of stuff. It is well used. Where they are available, the truckies do use them and that is good to see. The livestock operators have known about the process for a long time. Some of the phrases mentioned by the minister in his second reading speech probably relate more to the smaller operators in the livestock industry and not so much the B-double transport decks. The real problem we have with the 09 Oct 2007 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 3293 chain of responsibility that was introduced in 1996 is that, unfortunately, a lot of the smaller truck operators have been fined. I do not think that, in many cases, it has gone down far enough into who is actually pushing the people who drive the trucks. That is a bit unfortunate. I think I heard before that some of the consignors involved have been fined over a million dollars. I would be interested to know whether that is right. Consent or a warrant is generally required to enter a place but this bill provides powers for authorised officers to enter and search specified premises relating to heavy vehicles without a warrant or consent. This seems to breach all of the principles of good legislation. I cannot understand why they cannot obtain a warrant if they need to go into these places. This provision in the bill seems to be a heavy-handed approach. I really do not know why the liberties of those who drive trucks have to be given up. The previous minister, Mr Lucas, acknowledged that he did not want cowboys in the industry. I do not think anyone really wants cowboys in the industry but we do not want people victimised simply because of their poor literacy standards, for example. I ask the minister in his summing-up to give us an assurance that if an honest mistake such as a spelling error is made in a logbook he will not penalise people. We do not want good, honest, hardworking truck drivers penalised simply because of the fact that they made a minor error in their logbook. I turn now to the national heavy vehicle scheme maintenance program. I know that the major trucking operations in my area have quality assurance and TruckSafe programs in place. I think this provision will actually fall into place. As trucks with technology like the satellite navigation equipment on their dashes become available, the checking will fall into place. It makes sense for those provisions to be put in place. Further on in his second reading speech the minister mentioned the drug-driving provisions which will come into effect on 1 December. I would like to make sure that these provisions are brought in. I think the problem of people driving under the influence of drugs and people with repeat drug-driving convictions is probably bigger than we realise. It is good to see that there will be some way of enforcing the drug-driving provisions. I would be interested to know whether the minister has ideas concerning the rehabilitation of drug drivers. Unfortunately, we end up with a lot of people in our jails convicted of driving and traffic offences. I honesty do not know how else to handle them. It is a hard situation. Cars are so much a part of our lifestyle in the Western world. Some people who lose their licences continue to drive. I wonder whether the minister knows of any out-of-the-box ways that we might be able to solve this problem. Is there something they do in the Scandinavian countries that is a bit smarter or a bit brighter than what we do here? That should be investigated. There are provisions relating to challenging the accuracy and operation of radar and laser based speed and red-light devices. I have to admit that I am in the process of dealing with an issue concerning one of my constituents. They have wrong numberplate numbers and wrong dates. Some of the clerical work done by some of the police leaves a lot to be desired at times. Amendments to the transport act will give transport inspectors the power to seize things if the inspector reasonably believes a thing is evidence of an offence against the Motor Vehicle Insurance Act 1994. I think this is also a little heavy-handed. What right of appeal does a person have if they do not feel the seizure is appropriate? I would like the minister to advise if there is any right of appeal. I have had a conversation with one of the limousine owners in my electorate. They are at Greenbank and run airport and regional corporate cars. They are a good operation. They actually use a booking service. They take phone bookings and log all of their bookings. I would like the minister to clarify whether they actually have to have an electronic booking system. They use a phone system now and log the bookings. Is that sufficient? I would like to clarify that point because unfortunately the Limousine Association does not seem to be aware whether that is sufficient. Is a mobile phone booking transferred into a logbook good enough? Mr Mickel interjected. Mr RICKUSS: I see the minister is acknowledging that. That is very good. These people have concerns about that. If a logbook is sufficient for the heavy transport industry, then surely a logbook is sufficient for the limousine industry. I am glad to see that the minister is acknowledging that the logbook is sufficient. Mr Mickel interjected. Mr RICKUSS: Then downloaded on to a manual log. Mr Mickel interjected. Mr RICKUSS: Onto a computer of some sort or something. Is there technology available to do that sort of thing? I am not an IT guru. Mr Mickel interjected. Mr RICKUSS: That is all right, but after a week it is gone. A mobile phone does not have an enormous capacity. Mr Mickel: Come and see us. 3294 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 09 Oct 2007

Mr RICKUSS: That will be good. The bill also provides greater choice in terms of vehicles for chauffeurs. Many years ago my brother used to own a black Valiant. He used to get invited to a lot of weddings because he had a black Valiant. Is there any onus on a person if they are providing their vehicle for free for a wedding? How many limousines have actually been booked for touting on the Gold Coast or in Brisbane? I have used the odd limousine service but I have always rung up and booked them. Have there been any limousine operators booked for touting and, if so, how many and when? If the minister could answer that it would make things clearer. I support most of the provisions in this legislation. I think the transport industry supports most of this legislation. There really is a need for some reform. The heavy transport industry is trying to lift its game all of the time. As the trucks get better, the drivers get better and the operations get better, things will improve. There is a problem at the moment in terms of a shortage of drivers. With the mining industry boom and so on drivers are at a premium. Some people in my area are bringing drivers in on 457 visas and so on. There is a real shortage of drivers for the transport industry in Australia. I thank the minister for providing staff to brief me on the railway loop in the Purga area. Thank you for that, Minister. Better rail freight operations between Toowoomba, Sydney and Melbourne will ease the transport problems, but unfortunately they are 10 to 20 years away. That is the sort of process that we need. I support the bill, but I will go and see the minister’s staff. Mr ENGLISH (Redlands—ALP) (7.48 pm): It may surprise a number of members of the House to know that I actually grew up in and around the heavy vehicle industry. My father throughout his extensive career drove milk trucks, timber trucks, bulldozers and interstate coaches. I remember as a young boy and teenager spending many hours in the cab with him driving around parts of Queensland and Australia. Through the mid to late 1970s I saw a lot of what would be considered pretty appalling and pretty dodgy practices in the heavy vehicle industry. I have no doubt that the industry has improved significantly as a result of public pressure resulting in legislative reform from a series of governments over the last many years. I congratulate the government for introducing chain of responsibility legislation, because in my opinion one of the most vulnerable components of the heavy vehicle industry is of course the driver. The poor guy who jumps behind the wheel and takes a truck from point A to point B is very easy to manipulate in terms of emotional and financial pressure to encourage them to break the law. Previously when that happened, the person who put that pressure on them could stand back and say, ‘It’s not my fault.’ Again, I congratulate governments that have introduced chain of responsibility legislation to protect the lives of our heavy vehicle drivers and the lives of other road users. However, not many but some heavy vehicle operators have found very creative ways to get around the existing chain of responsibility legislation. Just like drug testing where chemists find more and more creative ways to mask steroids and performance-enhancing drugs, drug testers need to find more advanced and creative ways to go about identifying those drugs. This is a never-ending battle on many legislative fronts. Again, this legislation is another step forward in trying to change the laws so that we have more effective chain of responsibility legislation so we can hold those few dodgy operators accountable for the pressure that they are putting on their poor drivers to go out and break the law to make their house repayments, to make their truck repayments and to meet their financial commitments. I hope that the drivers feel somewhat safer with the modifications that we are making to the chain of responsibility legislation. I want to quickly comment on the hypocrisy of two comments made by the member for Lockyer, and the member for Lockyer made a very good speech on this bill. However, his position was internally inconsistent and, I guess to a degree, hypocritical. At one stage he said that he did not want Main Roads coming down too heavily on those poor drivers who make small clerical errors by misspelling a town. He said that it is easy to understand drivers making clerical errors and that drivers should not be held accountable for small errors, and I agree with him 100 per cent. Drivers should not be held accountable if they cannot spell town names such as Maroochydore correctly at 2 am in the morning. I do not think I could. I understand how drivers can make spelling errors when writing down towns and locations in their logbooks. But then the member for Lockyer had the hide to go and kick the coppers and say that when coppers make a small clerical error in a ticket that ticket should be waived. He said that it is appalling that cops make these horrendous clerical errors. What a hypocritical position to take! I do not have a problem with giving truck drivers a go if they make clerical errors, but the cops deserve the same break when they are sitting on the side of the road in pouring rain writing out a ticket at 2 am and they put a ‘2’ instead of a ‘3’ or a ‘B’ instead of a ‘V’. The coppers need the same break too. Such errors do not invalidate the ticket anyway. Again, I do not have a problem with giving truck drivers a break for human errors, but it should cut both ways. Some members opposite have raised concerns about the requirement in this bill for people who wish to challenge aspects of speed or red-light camera operation to give a description about what they want to challenge and feel that this is in some way undermining a defendant’s right to a fair trial or a 09 Oct 2007 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 3295 defendant’s ability to run an effective defence. I am a former police officer who has had to go through the task of assembling prosecution witnesses for a court case and then having them sit around for eight or 10 hours just for the defence to say, ‘We don’t need to call them.’ Firstly, it is very expensive. Given the fact that we should be trying to cut down on the wastage of money in government circles, I think this is a very effective step forward. It does not decrease a defendant’s right to a fair trial. He can challenge every aspect but just let the prosecution know. If he only wants to challenge one aspect of a particular device, then let the prosecution know and they will have the required expert there. It cuts down on the expense and it cuts down on wastage, and both sides of the House should be supporting cutting down on wastage. Finally, I want to briefly raise a common complaint in my electorate with the minister in relation to roadworks signage. There are national standards in relation to roadworks signage and how it should be constructed and laid out. One of the problems is that the workers who set up the signage and run the signage across the state are of varying ability in their adherence to those national standards. As a driver it is extremely frustrating when you see a sign indicating that people are working on the road ahead and you drive further and there is no-one working on the damn road. I have previously raised this issue with Minister Lucas, because it is an issue that I feel needs addressing. We need a mechanism to try to motivate the workers. Realistically, it is an occupational health and safety issue for those workers. But when the workers are off site, it is not an occupational health and safety issue for them but certainly causes frustration for drivers. I am not a fan of having laws that are not enforced. For these signs to have credibility, they have to be used appropriately. I encourage the minister to look at a mechanism to try to put pressure on roadworkers to use that signage correctly so that it does have credibility with drivers. With those few words, I commend this bill to the House. Mr HOBBS (Warrego—NPA) (7.56 pm): Tonight I am pleased to talk to the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill. There are a number of issues that have been covered, and I want to cover a few as well. This bill basically adopts the national compliance and enforcement reforms for heavy vehicles and makes improvements to the taxi and limousine industries to enhance the range of services available throughout Queensland. The minister’s second reading speech covers a number of interesting points and talks about improving road safety, traffic management and competitive equity while also helping to protect the environment and critical road infrastructure. However, people have to remember that Queensland is a very decentralised state with a huge network of roads. It also has a lot of transport of various shapes and sizes which operate throughout this state. In many instances people tend to blame trucks simply because they are intimidated by them, and they are intimidating, especially if there is a big type 1 or type 2 road train coming at you or that you have to pass. People also need to recognise the fact that in many instances our roads are deteriorating. We have experienced very dry conditions over the last few years. When we do happen to get rain in some areas, the roads really deteriorate and of course trucks will be wobbling along a little bit to a certain degree. It is not necessarily the fault of the trucks; it is the fault of our infrastructure. We need to ensure that we keep our infrastructure upgraded as much as we can, because we cannot keep curtailing and reducing the ability of our transport operators to provide the resources that we need and the transport infrastructure that is required to keep this great state moving. We must have improved safety, and there would not be a person alive who would not say that we have to try to improve the safety standards on our roads. If trucks are playing a part in terms of our state’s production, we have to look at ways to improve their safety. By the same token, there are plenty of road users who are not truck drivers and truck operators who are a damn menace on the roads. During his contribution the member for Lockyer said that in many instances local trucks are doing 80,000 to 100,000 kilometres a year, while road trains are doing 200,000 or 300,000 kilometres a year. There are a lot of people on the road who do not travel very many kilometres a year. So although, as the minister said in his second reading speech, trucks are overrepresented in accidents, the reality is that trucks are on the roads all the time. In many instances the amount of traffic that is on the road may contribute to some of those accidents. Also, rail is failing to meet the challenge of this century. It has not been out there trying to pick up a lot of freight that it should be able to carry. Therefore, there is more pressure on our road network. Obviously, the road transport industry has to go out there and cart freight because people ring up and say, ‘We want to move product from A to B’ and the easiest, fastest and cheapest way to do that is by road. We should be trying to get rail to pick up a lot of this freight. In many instances rail does not want the freight. I remember that years ago rail would lose interest in carting certain types of freight—whether that be cattle, wool or general freight. We would have to hold meetings, or ring them up and talk to them and eventually they would get all enthusiastic again, they would send somebody out, they would get the freight back on the rail and away they would go. But that has not been happening lately. There has been less and less freight carried by rail. Basically we have ended up with Queensland Rail buying interstate rail assets to try to help balance the books. Something is wrong when we have a market on our own doorstep and yet we are trying to find some easier markets interstate. I understand why this is happening, so I am not necessarily being critical; I am saying that I think there is a growing market here in Queensland that we also need to be able to take advantage of. 3296 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 09 Oct 2007

The minister in his second reading speech also referred to new general enforcement powers. That is fine. We have to make sure that people obey the law, but we need to manage things better and not necessarily become law enforcers. We can make things run smoothly provided we have a good system in place. We should not necessarily have to go out there with the big stick all the time. If we have incentives, if we have good systems in place, if we have good, wide roads in place, people will be able to obey the law. We only have to look at what is happening over in the States and the sort of road networks that they have over there. They do not have the problems that we have over here. Volumetric loading is very important. It is absolutely vital to the rural industry. I understand that we are not losing that through the provisions contained in this bill, but I was a bit perturbed when the minister stated— In addition to significant maximum fines, authorised officers will be allowed to give directions to the driver or operator of a vehicle which is subject to one or more severe, substantial or minor breaches of a mass, dimension or loading requirement. For example, where a truck carrying livestock is overweight, the authorised officer may direct the driver to the nearest spelling yard to remove some of the cattle before they can continue their journey. Perhaps the minister could clarify exactly what is meant by that statement. We need to be able to continue to have volumetric loading. I am sure that we could end up with a load of cattle of 24 per deck and, depending on whether it is cows or bullocks, we could get a variation in the weight. At the end of the day, if a truck is being loaded out of a set of yards at a station somewhere, that driver has no idea what the weight of the load will be. That is exactly why we have to have a volumetric system. That system works well and it really has not caused a great deal of problem. So I think that we need to ensure that that system continues. We have already started a system of compliance in relation to driver fatigue in terms of fining and so forth. But I understand that up to this point no consignor has been fined. The authorities have tended to go for the easy targets, such as the driver. He is a lay-down misere. They could get him pretty easily because he is the person in charge of the truck. The reality is that in many instances we need to be able to ensure that driving while fatigued is not entirely the driver’s fault. But that has not been the case. I do not think companies such as Woolies or Coles have been fined. I do not think that the authorities have been game to take them on. This legislation refers to putting in place reasonable steps to ensure that the load complies before the driver leaves with that load. Let us just wait and see what happens. In relation to drug driving—and I see the member for Fitzroy is in the chamber—I can remember from even during my time as a member of the Travelsafe Committee that that committee was pushing for drivers to be tested for drugs. It is wonderful that at least a system has been put in place that can test for drug driving. In many instances we have found that it was drug drivers who caused accidents that were blamed on transport operators or other users of the roads. I think the introduction of that method of testing is quite good. The reforms to the taxi industry that are contained in this bill are well overdue. It is outrageous that people on the Gold Coast in particular and certainly here in Brisbane on a Friday or a Saturday night experience delays in getting a taxi. The thing that really disturbs me the most is that on a Saturday or a Friday night people cannot call a cab from their mobile phone. They cannot get through to the taxi company. People have to ring somebody who has a landline and ask them to call for a taxi, because the mobile phone system just drops out. In terms of safety, I think that is just not right. I notice that, through this bill, a peak demand management plan is going to be put in place. Let us hope that it works, because we have a serious problem with our taxis. This morning I heard the minister refer to the fact that we have 1,800 people coming to Queensland every month, or whatever it was. A lot of people are coming to Queensland because they want to live here. It is a great place to live, but at the end of the day we have to provide the infrastructure to cater for that growth so that those people who come here can lead reasonable lives. As well, we should ensure that the people who live here now and who have lived here for generations can at least get a cab home at night. People cannot drink and drive. It is important that they have access to some sort of transport, otherwise they have to either try to walk home or get a ride home from someone else. This bill contains many worthwhile amendments. The shadow minister made a very detailed contribution to this debate. The previous shadow minister, the member for Gregory, also made a detailed contribution. I think we are making progress, but we have to ensure that we do not put the blame all the time on truck drivers when our road network is deteriorating at the same time as our transport industry is growing. The people involved in our transport industry are very, very efficient. They live on the smell of an oily rag. They provide a wonderful service to us. We would not be able to get the building materials that we need to build our houses or the milk that we use in the morning without the people who are involved in our transport industry. So the more we go out and flog them, the harder it becomes for them. They are really under pressure, particularly with fuel prices at present. The transport industry is a very, very competitive industry, particularly in terms of general freight. Although the beef industry had been going pretty strong for a number years, at present it is in a lot of trouble. A lot of those trucks that were involved in transporting cattle are now involved in general freight. So there is a lot of competition out there. That means that we always get freight transported at a very reasonable rate. I do 09 Oct 2007 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 3297 not think that we should try to drag down the people involved in the transport industry. We need to make sure that we can work with the industry so that we can provide it in Queensland with the best resources and the best infrastructure. Mrs PRATT (Nanango—Ind) (8.09 pm): I rise to speak to the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 2007. I have heard a lot of speeches delivered on this bill and overall they have been very positive towards the legislation. In rural areas, we virtually live with trucks—B-doubles, semitrailers, road trains et cetera. They provide the primary means of transporting cattle and pigs to abattoirs or farm produce to market. From my area those trucks often travel to places such as Dinmore and Kilcoy. Trucks are continually on our roads, taking animals to slaughter to feed the population. All farm produce, whether it be peanuts, navy beans or anything else that we grow, goes out on trucks of some description. Trucks and semitrailers bring in all the stock for our business houses. Supermarkets like Woolies and Coles have trucks continually on the roads, loaded with the requirements for their stores. This is occurring more and more. More and more heavy vehicles are on our roads. As this bill is primarily aimed at road safety, it can only be commended. As more and more trucks use the road and as safety is a priority, it is necessary to bring our roads up to scratch, because currently they are not up to scratch. We need more overtaking lanes, better surfaces and wider lanes as country roads can be very narrow. I was quite amazed when I read the statistics in the minister’s second reading speech. I did not realise that the statistics were so bad. Even though trucks are involved in a lot of accidents that result in fatalities, I have to ask whether they were necessarily the responsible party. It is easy to say that if a truck was involved then it was probably the truck’s fault, but we need to be aware that that is not necessarily true. However, if a heavy truck collides with a car, the weight behind that truck will often mean that a fatality occurs. I turn to the issue of the overloading of trucks. Often trucks are overloaded because of the desire to get as much product to a destination in as quick a time as possible. There is a competitive advantage in being able to deliver greater quantities on time. Unfortunately, I believe that there is a huge failing within our infrastructure system. We have not continued to embrace rail as we did in years gone by. More and more freight is transported on the roads, and I believe that that is because of convenience. With road transport, the product is transported from point A to point B, involving only one lot of handling. With rail freight, the product is taken via truck to the train and then from the train onto a truck and to its destination. A lot of people I have spoken to say that rail is not convenient or competitive, especially when freighting livestock. A certain length of time is involved. A farmer may need to unload a bit of stock this week but cannot get the stock booked onto a train for three weeks or more. That is not convenient in any way, shape or form, so he will put his stock on a truck and send them by road. In addition, the overall cost of freighting by rail can be more expensive because of the double handling, so again they choose to transport by road. A lot of drivers get into trouble for overloading and for pushing the time frames, but I think that is unfair because it is not necessarily of their own making. Therefore, I agree totally with the idea of the chain of responsibility. A lot of drivers believe that they are pushed. I do not know whether or not company owners really do push their drivers—whether that presumption or expectation really exists—or whether the drivers simply believe that they do. However, we do know that they push themselves to a huge degree. A lot of legislation has passed through this House to try to bring truckies into line by stating that they have to stop and rest at appropriate times et cetera. However, to do that they need rest areas and I know that the government is working towards getting enough rest areas, hopefully with toilets and so on. Where I come from there are certainly not many rest areas with toilets. The rest areas need to be away from houses because of issues of noise and privacy. If drivers have to visit the side of the road for whatever reason, they need a bit of privacy. Also, while there needs to be a bit of light, it would be appreciated if the light was not too bright. Those people are fighting fatigue, and if they cannot sleep because of bright lights that fatigue will not go away. Drivers need quality sleep. We need appropriate rest areas for drivers to pull into. Someone has mentioned that old roads are perfect places for rest areas. When I travel long distances, old roads come in very handy when I get tired. Many members have mentioned the good points of the bill and discussed some of the problems associated with the issues it raises. I would like to put forward a couple of answers to some of the problems that have been raised. The first one relates to the requirement that trucks and general traffic slow down as they enter towns. I am talking about towns like Woodford, Esk, Blackbutt and Yarraman. Let us be honest: often drivers do not slow down to the speed limit of 60, or whatever it is. When I was in South Africa recently I was struck by something that I believe we could implement here. Although we already put rumble strips in to warn drivers that a 60 zone is coming up and that they must slow down, the strips do not necessarily stop the traffic. Drivers feel them and hear them, but nine times out of 10 they ignore them. In South Africa, on the approach to many country towns at the 80 sign they have installed speed bumps that are small enough that one can just feel them. At the 60 sign they 3298 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 09 Oct 2007 have installed bigger speed bumps, and 10 metres further on they have installed quite large speed bumps. If those larger bumps are hit at any speed greater than 60, the driver gets a very nasty jolt. The drivers of all the traffic I saw—trucks, cars, everything—took notice and slowed down as they entered the rural towns. They slowed right down. It worked. Rumble strips are not working; apparently speeds bumps do. We hear about trucks for various reasons slipping gears while descending ranges. Perhaps they were going too fast and slipped a gear. A lot of trucks have accidents that way. Quite often the Toowoomba range is closed for such reasons. In Africa I noticed that whenever there are two lanes the left-hand lane is specifically for trucks. Semitrailers and trucks over a certain weight are not allowed to overtake. If they get stuck behind somebody, they have to stay there. If a truck cannot maintain the speed limit, there is an obligation that the driver pull over into the nearest lay-by area and let the traffic go past. I do not know why, but people did it. Another thing that I thought particularly good is that at the top of a range or a steep decent all trucks have to pull over into a side road similar to where weighbridges are located. There are no weighbridges there, but they have to pull over—literally stop their vehicle and put the truck into first gear. Every single truck does that, and I was told that that is because a camera is situated at such places and every truck that comes through is recorded on camera. If they do not stop and go into that particular point, they receive a substantial fine. That was reported to me. Every truck that I saw pulled in, slowed down and got into first gear—they had to literally stop the vehicle to do that—and then they took off down the hill. There was no chance of them losing it, unless there was a major malfunction. Those ideas are worth investigating. Slowing the traffic down is one thing that every government has had trouble with. I believe that installing speed bumps at the entrances to towns would help to save lives. I also have a concern in relation to the infringement on civil liberties where a warrant is not necessary to search vehicles. I have always had a problem with that. A couple of instances have been reported to me by people in my own area. In one instance a person was picked up for spelling errors. I cannot understand why the government does not go to a similar system to that of pilots. If a pilot wants to fly to Kingaroy they put ‘KRY’. If they want to go somewhere else they use three initials of that town. Maroochydore, for instance, is MDR. They just have an abbreviation. It is not hard to do. I cannot understand why if it is done in that industry it could not be done across the transport industry for logbooks. People have been picked up for spelling errors. I would be surprised if the people who are driving trucks are the greatest spellers in the world. A lot of educated people cannot spell very well. The standard of spelling coming out of our schools today at times is quite horrendous. If we could go to an abbreviated system such as that used by pilots I think that could possibly be an advantage. In another instance a truck was pulled up to be searched for drugs. All of the driver’s personal items were taken out of the truck and dumped on the side of the road. Nothing was found. The officer went to get back in his car and drive away and the driver yelled out to him, ‘Hey, what about all this gear that you have dumped on the road?’, and he said, ‘That’s your problem,’ got in the car and drove off. I think that is a pretty pathetic way to conduct business. I am not saying that all officers do that. That was one instance. I remember the previous minister saying to report them and he will make sure it is addressed and they do not do it again. People do not report it for the simple reason that they fear being targeted. The minister can say that that does not happen, but I am pretty sure that it probably does. Overall, I support the bill. There are a couple of things that cause me concern. One issue that the member for Gladstone raised was with regard to persons not in uniform being able to stop and search vehicles. That would worry me. I also tell my family to not stop unless they are sure it is a police officer, to not stop unless they are in a lighted area and to not stop unless there are other people around. If that is encouraging my children to break the law then I am sorry, but I will continue to do it. I must admit that I would not stop in those circumstances either. With those few words, I commend the bill to the House with a few reservations. Ms MALE (Glass House—ALP) (8.22 pm): I rise in support of the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 2007. I particularly wish to speak in support of some of the key road safety amendments to the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995. The bill firstly contains an amendment extending the period for commencing proceedings against offenders of serious hit-and-run incidents. The frequency of hit-and-run crashes on Queensland roads should be a concern to all in the community. As the former minister for transport and main roads highlighted in the second reading speech, in 2006 alone nine people were killed as a result of a hit-and-run driver and more than 130 people were hospitalised. Members may not be aware that identifying offenders of hit-and-run crashes can be a protracted process and the offender may not be known to authorities for some time after the date of the actual offence. This makes sense when one stops and thinks of the nature of a hit-and-run offence itself. The Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995 currently provides that proceedings for an offence under the act must commence within one year after the offence was committed. The act also permits proceedings to commence six months after the offence comes to the complainant’s knowledge, although this cannot be more than two years after the offence was committed. These time frames presently apply to proceedings against drivers who commit hit-and-run offences. This bill will 09 Oct 2007 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 3299 extend the time for commencing proceedings against a hit-and-run offender to three years from the date the offence was committed. This extended time frame will only apply in circumstances where the incident results in injury to or death of a person and not where the incident results only in property damage. Further, the change will only apply to a person charged in relation to an incident that occurs after the commencement of this bill. Hit-and-run offences can have a devastating effect not just on the victim but also on the family and friends of the victim. This is indeed a valuable amendment in view of the devastating effect these offences can have on the community. Another important amendment in this bill relates to drug-driving offences and the appropriateness of penalties for such offences. In February this year the Transport Legislation and Another Act Amendment Act 2007 was passed to introduce an offence for drivers who have certain drugs present in their bodies. If convicted of such an offence, a driver will be disqualified from holding or obtaining a Queensland drivers licence. The bill amends these unproclaimed drug-driving offence provisions so that a person who commits repeat drug-driving offences will be required to serve their driver licence disqualification periods cumulatively and not concurrently. What this means is that where a person is disqualified by a court two or more times for driving while they have drugs in their system, the person will be required to serve out the combined total of those disqualification periods. This amendment reflects recent amendments that will impose cumulative disqualification periods on repeat drink drivers. I strongly commend this amendment to the House. Finally, the bill amends the current definition of ‘bicycle’ in the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995 to expressly exclude vehicles fitted with an internal combustion engine. Presently, a bicycle is defined in the act to exclude a vehicle with an auxiliary motor capable of generating more than 200 watts. However, it is extremely difficult for Queensland police to assess the power output of an internal combustion engine to ensure it complies with the 200 watt limit. In practice, it is almost impossible to do so without confiscating the bicycle and testing the motor. Furthermore, there has been a recent increase in the number of bicycles fitted with auxiliary motors. These include internal combustion motors, virtually all of which generate well in excess of 200 watts. To give some context to this, 200 watts is the equivalent of two lightbulbs. There have been examples of people fitting whipper snipper type motors to ordinary pushbikes so as to assist them in moving about. The potential speed capability of some bicycles with the higher powered internal combustion motors makes them dangerous, especially when used with conventional bicycle safety equipment like brakes. Clearly these vehicles do not belong on our roads. This amendment will assist Queensland police in identifying and dealing with these vehicles on our roads, ensuring road safety for all road users. I commend the bill to the House. Mr DEMPSEY (Bundaberg—NPA) (8.26 pm): I rise to support the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill. This amendment bill directly supports two very important industries that drive Queensland—that is, the trucking industry and the taxi industry, which is linked with the limousine business as well. We have heard a number of comments in the House tonight about the trucking industry, mainly on the negative side. Bundaberg has a proud trucking industry history of delivering goods on time and in a safe condition—not just for the driver but for the goods. It is time to not only support the drivers but support the industry and the families of those drivers and recognise the hard work that they do to make sure that Queensland and Bundaberg keeps going and is provided with supplies to those industries within our community. It is interesting to note that, whilst tonight we talk about the number of truck accidents in comparison to other accidents that happen on our roads, truck drivers, under exceptional circumstances and in different weather and road conditions, are driving far in excess of the amount of driving that the average driver on the road would do. That has to be remembered and they have to be commended for that as well. They are a hardworking group. From my previous experience as a police officer, when speaking to them at any given time one always knew that they were honest and hardworking. They were supporting not just themselves but their families, and they drove those trucks with great passion. They were not just driving a bunch of goods; they knew that they were bringing those goods to market or to towns and making sure that they got there on time. The industry that employs these drivers looks for people with certain intestinal fortitude to ensure that those goods are delivered on time. I congratulate the government for bringing forth these amendments in relation to the trucking industry. It is very important that any measures that are brought forth are measures that also affect the general safety of all road users. Anything that we can do along that avenue is good for us all. However, with the amendments that will be moved tonight, one thing that rings true is the lack of consultation. That lack of consultation is again firmly entrenched when we look at the time frames involved and the need for which these amendments are being brought forward. They are good amendments, but how are we going to enforce them? Do we have the resources to enforce them? Are there more practical measures that could be put forward to make our roads safer, and in particular our trucks safer on these roads? The member for Hinchinbrook spoke tonight about increased rest areas and road infrastructure. We know how important the trucking industry is to Queensland, so if we are going to keep putting restrictions and imposing legislation on truck drivers for safety reasons we have to make sure that we support them. It is a huge commitment that they make to the rest of Queensland, and they bring a lot to the table. 3300 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 09 Oct 2007

In relation to the amendments for taxidrivers, Bundaberg has approximately 30 taxidrivers. They are the eyes and ears of the community. They are hardworking, passionate people. They go above and beyond what they have to do as taxidrivers. When someone is sick and injured, you can see them taking the time to take the elderly out of the cabs, to bring the elderly and their groceries into their houses. Again, you see them taking the time to assist people with disabilities. These people do not do that simply because of money. They do it because they have a passionate interest in the industry and a sense of believing that they are actually contributing to the community. The changes to the taxi industry, and particularly to the limousine industry, seem to be applying to south-east Queensland and not the whole of Queensland. This legislation will go through the whole of Queensland. In small local areas like Bundaberg we see people in the limousine industry and the taxi industry working together. I can see the rationale in making changes to limousine owners to ensure they work in with the taxi industry, but for the rest of Queensland we can see a lot of cooperation and hand-in- glove partnership which will now be affected due to a number of changes. The work of the taxidrivers in Bundaberg gives me an opportunity to speak to the minister. We are greatly in need of a temporary marshalling area in Bundaberg. Saturday and Sunday nights are atrocious. It is a real safety issue. I hope to be taking this issue up with the minister’s office later in relation to local councils as well as the local industry. It is an area which has been identified, and we hope to get some minor funding to put a temporary taxi marshalling area in place for a trial period to be able to facilitate those safety issues as well as protect taxidrivers. In closing, I would like to thank the minister and support the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill. Hon. RJ MICKEL (Logan—ALP) (Minister for Transport, Trade, Employment and Industrial Relations) (8.33 pm), in reply: The bill contains an important suite of changes to significant transport legislation. It delivers a range of critical reforms to the transport sector. Before we go any further, I want to thank the range of staff who have been assisting me all afternoon. I want them to know that I respect their enthusiasm and their professionalism, and the fact that after eight hours they are still awake. I do need them for a little longer. As the member for Kawana is in the House, too, he might like to know that some of them have been drinking recycled water and so far there does not seem to be any ill effects on any of them. This bill delivers on a range of key initiatives for this government as well as ensuring Queensland continues to play a leading role in the national transport agenda. The most significant amendments in the bill are the adoption of national compliance and enforcement reforms for heavy vehicles, and improvements to the taxi and limousine industries to enhance the range of services available throughout Queensland. The bill makes a number of minor changes to other transport legislation to ensure delivery of an important infrastructure project and clarify legislation where required. As honourable members are aware, the majority of amendments within the bill relate to the adoption of the national compliance and enforcement reforms which are aimed at improving compliance with heavy vehicle operating requirements. As was mentioned at the beginning of the debate, relative to other classes of vehicles, heavy vehicles are significantly overrepresented in crashes causing fatalities. In 2006, for example, heavy vehicles accounted for 10.3 per cent of fatal crashes while comprising only 2.5 per cent of registered vehicles in Queensland. The member for Clayfield made mention of the road safety performance of heavy vehicles and the road toll more generally. Firstly, I want to emphasise that road safety is not just the responsibility of government. It is also—and I think fundamentally—the responsibility of people behind the wheel. Road safety campaigns are one key part of an overall approach to road safety in Queensland. They work in conjunction with enforcement, education and engineering to change behaviour. It is misleading, as the member for Clayfield tried to claim, that because the road toll is higher than last year the campaigns are not working. The road safety campaigns, from what I can understand of them, are soundly based and will continue to be used by the government. Secondly, part of the reason for the current reforms not getting to parliament sooner is that in early 2006 resources were reallocated to work on the Queensland Road Safety Summit legislation. It was quite disingenuous of the member for Clayfield to claim that this delay was because of some incompetence. In fact, the Road Safety Summit bill introduced a number of road safety programs including the new young drivers laws and roadside drug testing. In fact, during the debate on the Road Safety Summit bill in February 2007, the member for Clayfield specifically asked the government to act swiftly in implementing the reforms to improve young driver safety. This is exactly what the government did. I would like to make mention of the strong role played by industry in Queensland in improving the road safety record of the road freight industry, particularly the members of the Road Freight Industry Council. These groups, and the majority of those involved in the industry, are vigilant in endeavouring to engage in safe operations and support the reforms contained in this bill. I want to formally recognise their contributions tonight. 09 Oct 2007 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 3301

The reforms will strip away the commercial advantage of trucking operators who broke the law and will ultimately result in a safer environment for all road users who share the road with heavy vehicles. All states and territories in Australia have agreed to adopt the same integrated legislation and structure, and specific heavy vehicle operating standards as contained in this bill. This is very important, because it sends a strong signal that road authorities across Australia are serious about cooperating in improved enforcement and compliance and, by this, improve the safety and efficiency of the road freight industry. It is not just about better enforcement. The compliance and enforcement powers in this bill will also extend to the national model fatigue legislation which is due to be implemented in September 2008. The honourable member for Gregory made mention of the challenges of managing fatigue in freight movements between the Northern Territory and Queensland. Currently the Northern Territory is an unregulated zone in regard to fatigue, but I am pleased to advise the House that the Northern Territory has committed to implement the national fatigue package, meaning improved heavy vehicle road safety between our two jurisdictions. The bill contains important amendments relating to authorised officers’ powers. In summary, it provides additional power to enter and search for evidence; extends existing powers in relation to moving vehicles; strengthens investigatory powers; and incorporates provisions which will assist in cross-border investigations of offences. Some honourable members expressed concerns about these powers. I can assure them that in Queensland there were extra protections provided in that a transport inspector must consult with a police inspector before conducting a warrantless search, I am advised, and after being involved in the activities must confirm the results of the search with a magistrate. The bill also incorporates a provision which will enable a court to order a penalty aimed at redressing the commercial benefit that a person would gain from engaging in dangerous and unlawful behaviour. The member for Lockyer asked a specific question about appeal rights in relation to seized items. I can assure the honourable member that the current provisions in relation to seized items will remain. An item may not be seized unless the authorised officer reasonably believes the item is evidence of a transport offence. In practice, a seizure is adopted as a last resort. Further, a seizure item must be returned to its owner immediately its retention as evidence is no longer necessary. The second focus of the reforms is in relation to mass, dimension and loading offences. In this regard, the bill strengthens and extends aspects relating to chain of responsibility; incorporates the reasonable steps defence; and incorporates a ‘risk based categorisation’ of offences. Queensland is justifiably proud of its record in chain of responsibility prosecutions. Queensland has successfully prosecuted 404 drivers on a total of 2,391 charges and a further 207 influencing persons on a total of 1,732 charges. The symbolism of this success cannot be underestimated—a number of key prosecutions are no longer in the business. The provisions proposed tonight will take our successes even further. With regard to the chain of responsibilities, I was disappointed to hear the member for Tablelands continue to focus on responsibility for workers—that is, the drivers—but not support the push to move responsibility throughout the transport chain. She alone of all the members stood aside from the legislation in that respect. The government also recognises the important contribution that Queensland’s primary industries play in the state’s economy. That is why the government is committed to maintaining both the volumetric loading scheme for the livestock industry and the Grain Harvest Management Scheme. The government acknowledges the role the livestock welfare driving hours scheme has played in managing fatigue for the livestock transport industry and is committed to working with industry, while being mindful of the greater body of fatigue research developed since the scheme’s introduction in 1998. The member for Gregory asked me and I do not want to break the confidence. I do acknowledge that he has offered to work with me on this. I would value his support or at least his advice should we ever have to come and look at this legislation in the future. I do welcome that advice. The member for Gladstone specifically inquired about powers for authorised officers in clause 39 of the bill. This amendment does not reflect new policy and merely is to locate all requirements regarding the exercise of powers by an authorised officer in relation to private vehicles into the act. Section 31 allows authorised officers to require a person to stop a private vehicle at a checkpoint or if the officer reasonably believes the vehicle does not comply with a transport act. The section contains a reasonable excuse against compliance with such requirements. The amendment transfers the existing limitations on the exercise of powers by transport inspectors in relation to light vehicles into the act, specifically that transport inspectors may not intercept private vehicles at night and transport inspectors not wearing a uniform may only exercise their powers if the officer reasonably believes the vehicle is so dangerous that it will be likely to cause death or injury. I turn now to the taxi and limousine industry. This is the one that caused a lot of discussion in the opposition. Let me see if we can help them through it. The amendments contained in this bill that relate to the taxi and limousine industries deliver significant enhancements to implement important reform initiatives for taxis and limousines, improving services for the community. The reforms will improve the 3302 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 09 Oct 2007 quality of the services available and the safety and security of taxi and limousine patrons and drivers in the Queensland community. Both are important outcomes. These legislative changes allow for peak demand taxis—which is one of the aspects raised by many of the members on the Gold Coast—special purpose limousines and the recording of limousine bookings. As was pointed out by the member for Clayfield, under the national competition policy, Queensland reviewed the Transport Operations (Passenger Transport) Act 1994. This review contained recommendations to further improve what I believe are strong taxi and limousine industries in Queensland. Working with the taxi and limousine industries, the Queensland government in August 2003 endorsed 14 initiatives that were released in a discussion paper in May 2004 for extensive consultation with the taxi industry, the limousine industry and members of the public. I understand that over 1,200 copies of the discussion paper were distributed and 11 workshops were held throughout Queensland. As a result of Queensland Transport’s progress on reforms, the National Competition Council released all of Queensland’s suspended payments about taxi and limousine regulations and no penalty was applied. This is a clear indication of the health of the taxi and limousine industries in Queensland. I understand that at this stage the department was consulting jointly with both industries. I also understand that when it was consulting jointly it proved unworkable due to the tensions between the industries. Rather than pursuing unproductive meetings with a single steering committee, the department decided to consult through the longstanding industry consultation forums—the Strategic Planning Committee for Taxis and the Strategic Planning Committee for Limousines. I understand that this has proven to be far more productive in terms of supporting and progressing industry initiatives. This seems to fly in the face of the assertion of the member for Clayfield that the consultation was inadequate. The provisions were there. The strategies were put in place. Further, the member for Clayfield raised the issue of what he termed ‘fitted’ electronic booking systems in limousines. I point out that the word ‘fitted’ does not appear in the legislation. There is no intention that the electronic booking system must be firmly attached to the vehicle, as was suggested by the member for Clayfield. I remind the member that cars are ‘fitted’ with a spare wheel and a jack, but these items are not necessarily bolted or affixed to the vehicle. The term ‘fitted’ is a generic term for an item being present in the vehicle and, as a result, a mobile phone is clearly sufficient to meet the legislative criteria. The assertion of the member for Clayfield that there was limited consultation, as I said before, is clearly wrong. Queensland Transport has met members of the Limousine Association Queensland on this issue from inception. I understand that the matter of electronic booking systems has been discussed in detail since August 2005 in industry meetings. Indeed, the tri-monthly Strategic Planning Committee meetings chaired by the department have as a standing agenda item ‘progress on the reform initiatives’. I understand that at no time has the Limousine Association advised the department that it did not support electronic bookings. I understand also that minutes of meetings held on 15 August 2005 and 21 February 2006 actually note the opposite—that the industry, I am advised, actually supported the initiative in this format. To suggest inappropriate, ineffective or improper consultation, as the member for Clayfield did, is an insult to the hardworking, professional officers of Queensland Transport. I once again remind the honourable member that this particular initiative has been developed in response to complaints from the limousine industry itself. I instance an article in the Gold Coast Bulletin on 19 September 2007 which states— For the first time Queensland Transport has issued Gold Coast year 12 students with a letter warning parents to stick to known commercial operators and to demand credentials before booking vehicles for formal events. A spokesman yesterday confirmed the warning was in response to complaints from the limousine industry which claimed shoddy operators and private car owners were damaging the industry’s reputation. Further, if members listened to the contribution of the member for Robina—I do not want to paraphase it—they would have heard him mention that he has been the victim of the touting of limousine operators. In other words, we had two opposition speakers within a few minutes of each other and one contradicting the shadow minister. We will continue working closely with the taxi and limousine industries maintaining a cooperative and collaborative relationship to further other initiatives as they emerge. One of the common themes raised by speakers has been the importance of peak demand taxis and I note that the initiatives proposed have been supported by a number of opposition speakers, including the members for Robina and Currumbin. In contrast the member for Clayfield claimed that it was just another bureaucratic burden. One of the challenges faced by taxi companies is the ability to adequately meet peak demand taxi times during special events such as major sporting events. In response, this legislation will allow Queensland Transport to release peak demand taxi permits to taxi booking companies which will allow taxi booking companies to provide extra vehicles for busy periods. The written peak demand management plan will enable the department to ensure that all peak demand incidents are covered off appropriately and that the correct number of peak demand permits are identified as being required. 09 Oct 2007 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 3303

It is this document which, once approved, enables regional offices to issue the correct number of peak demand permits to operators. The provision of sufficient taxis during peak times will minimise long waiting times and queues, reduce the risk of incidents and increase the feeling of safety for patrons and taxidrivers. In order to ensure that this particular initiative is developed appropriately the department has been undertaking a trial for over a year where taxi booking companies are authorised to utilise their existing substitute fleet as peak demand vehicles during peak times, covering all taxi contract areas including, as the member for Clayfield and the Gold Coast members may be pleased to note, the Gold Coast taxi service area. There are 300 taxi licences operating on the Gold Coast, I am advised. The most recent review recommended additional licences. In 2006 Queensland Transport released 35 new taxi licences and is now considering the release of up to 15 new licences by tender. The poor member for Currumbin was confused. She thought they paid a fee to get a taxi. They do not. They do it by tender. That tender is what drives the price. The member for Hinchinbrook requested clarification about the need for an additional taxi licence in Mission Beach. I am advised that Queensland Transport has conducted a review applying the criteria for taxi licence reviews. Queensland Transport believes that the data does not support an additional full- time licence but there is a need to meet peak demand. Queensland Transport is working with local taxi operators to find suitable solutions to meet their needs. In response to an identified consumer demand this bill also enables the introduction of special purpose limousines in addition to the general limousine service. These special purpose limousine licences are restricted to use at weddings, social events such as school formals, dances and balls and graduation ceremonies, and tourist services. It allows for existing limousine operators to offer a wider choice of vehicles while taking into consideration the limited use of such services and therefore the limited return to operators. The special purpose limousines have a minimum age limit of 30 years and will be distinguished by their distinctive numberplate which starts with the letters SL. As noted in this debate, limousines must be prebooked at all times except when operating from an approved limousine rank. It is one of the key elements that differentiates a limousine from a taxi. Up until now, limousine operators did not have to record prebookings which made it difficult for Queensland Transport inspectors to determine the existence of prior bookings, which, as the member for Clayfield would appreciate, has resulted in minimal successful prosecutions for illegal operations of this nature. As I said before, the member for Robina, if I heard him correctly, said that he had direct experience of what he called rogue operators. A record of prior booking will now provide a means for compliance officers to quickly identify whether limousines are operating illegally. When the changes to the act and regulations are in place operators will be required to keep a record of all bookings on a recording information system. As a result, Queensland Transport officers will be able to confirm the existence of a prior booking. I am advised that the limousine industry regularly raises the issue of illegal limousine operations with the department. The requirement to have an electronic record will assist the department and the industry to ensure compliance activity is well and truly focused on illegal activities rather than wasting time checking the credentials of legal operators. In developing this initiative, Queensland Transport considered paper based systems. Both the department and the peak industry body, the Limousine Association Queensland, identified, as I understand it, potential misuse of paper based systems. As the industry has often noted, all limousine operators operate mobile phones. For this reason, during the assessment of the types of technology and appropriate recording systems the level of electronic booking systems required by these changes will be as simple as a mobile phone recording an SMS message. This initiative has been developed to utilise existing 21st century technology. However, as with all new initiatives—and I give this undertaking—Queensland Transport is committed to ongoing consultation with the industry and is consulting further with industry on the practical application of this requirement through and during the regulation development stage. Indeed, as recently as 2 October 2007, at a meeting with the Limousine Association Queensland representatives, Paul Blake, the executive director, reinforced that the department wished the new legislation to be workable for both the industry and the department and offered to work with the association to ensure that we achieve this through the regulations. Further, Queensland Transport has committed to continue to review these initiatives for up to 12 months following implementation, in consultation with operators. This will ensure that the initiative meets the intent of enabling compliance activities to identify and punish rogue operators. I will specifically point out that the special purpose limousines will not require electronic booking systems. These limousines are specifically designed for a niche clientele and will not be eligible to operate in the wider limousine market. The types of vehicles able to operate under a special purpose 3304 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 09 Oct 2007 limousine licence are vintage vehicles, readily recognisable. For this reason Queensland Transport does not foresee compliance issues similar to the matters arising in the general limousine industry which are being addressed by this amendment. This reform package will provide the way forward for personalised public transport services in Queensland such as taxis and limousines. The package, once implemented, will position Queensland at the forefront of community responsive transport services in Australia. It will also provide the catalyst to continually monitor services with the aim to plan and make incremental changes to cope with future demands as they occur. It is the intention of the government to ensure that taxi and limousine services are safe, secure, efficient and customer responsive. I commend a whole range of cooperative effort that has occurred between industry and my department in developing improvements. I want to encourage a continuation of this relationship and see government and industry working towards a sustainable transport system based on moving people and connecting communities. I want to specifically talk now about the impact of penalty amendments on TransLink contracts. The member for Clayfield asked about the penalty unit amendment for breaches of contract requirements, which is only applicable to service contracts entered into under chapter 6 of the Transport Operations (Passenger Transport) Act 1994. The TransLink bus operator contracts are established under this chapter and it is expected that under the new TransLink authority, as per the Premier’s and my announcements this morning, the increased penalty units will apply to these contracts. With regard to the QR Citytrain contract that is currently being negotiated, it is established from the chief executive’s powers to enter into transport agreements that exist under the Planning and Coordination Act 1994. Performance measures contained within the contract will outline the performance requirements and associated penalties. As per the announcements this morning, much work is yet to be done regarding the establishment and governance of the TransLink authority. However, it is expected that the contractual arrangements for services will remain. The member for Clayfield specifically spoke about the Gateway Arterial. I think the former minister dealt with him sufficiently. It is the incompetence of the Howard government in not funding that sort of infrastructure— Mr Nicholls interjected. Mr MICKEL: No matter how much you giggle and carry on, you are simply hiding your embarrassment over the fact that the federal government has failed Queensland and in a couple of weeks— Mr Nicholls interjected. Mr MICKEL: The smart card has been introduced and rolled out. My friend, if you wanted to get in the marketplace of ideas, all you had to do was find a candidate for Brisbane Central instead of sitting there laughing in the asinine way that you do. The Gateway Arterial is a federally funded program. You did not get the funding. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Wendt): Order! Will all members please direct their comments through the chair. Mr MICKEL: The member for Clayfield also mentioned the hardship acquisition of land by the state. If persons are adversely affected by the announcement of the Airport Link project, the state hardship policy permits the state to offer to buy those persons’ property on a voluntary basis for fair market value. Once it acquires the land in the scheme area, the state will hold that land until the final corridor is identified, the project is constructed and the state determines that the land is surplus to its requirements. At this time the state is not in a position to sell any land acquired by the Airport Link project and may not be in that position for some years to come. In terms of the busway amendment, the bill contains an amendment to the Transport Planning and Coordination Act 1994 regarding the acquisition of land for busways. Amendment of the act is required to facilitate the Queensland government’s delivery of important busway infrastructure projects. The member for Clayfield—and I do not know how many times he got it wrong in this bill—wrongly asserted that these amendments are as a result of the wrong director-general acquiring land for the Inner Northern Busway. In actual fact, the amendments are to remove any doubt about the acquisitions for this vital project. These amendments are to ensure that there is no legal challenge to ensure this critical project goes on unimpeded. These amendments will ensure that those acquisitions made on behalf of the chief executive of Queensland Transport are valid and the removal of the interim measure requiring acquisitions is made only by the Department of Main Roads. Before concluding, I wish to foreshadow that I intend to move some amendments to the bill in the consideration in detail stage. I now table the explanatory notes for those amendments to the bill. Tabled paper: Explanatory notes to amendments to the Transport Legislation Amendment Bill. With that, I commend the bill to the House. Question put—That the bill be now read a second time. Motion agreed to. 09 Oct 2007 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 3305

Consideration in Detail Clauses 1 to 28, as read, agreed to. Clause 29— Mr NICHOLLS (9.04 pm): We have just heard in the minister’s response a little diatribe, a bit of personal abuse and a few things like that addressed to me, but we still have not heard from him an answer to the question that I asked in respect of the electronic devices—that is, how many complaints have been received, how many investigations have been undertaken and how many prosecutions have been successfully undertaken in relation to touting by limousine owners, which relates to driving the justification for section 87B(2) and 87B(3)? We still have not had a response in relation to that question I asked during the second reading debate. It is indicative that the minister chose to perhaps try to denigrate these complaints that were made and these concerns—very real concerns—of the association. In doing so, I think he shows his own hand. In respect of section 87B and the consultation issue, I want to read from an email I received on 6 October from the president of the LAQ, the Limousine Association Queensland. It states— Dear Tim Attached is a copy of the letters to Mr Mickel and the Premier. It goes on to refer to those letters, and I am happy to show a copy to the minister or table them. It continues— The LAQ had a meeting with QT—Paul Blake and three other staff—on Tuesday afternoon, 2 October. However, they were not prepared to change their position on the bill. For the department to consult for a total of 15 to 20 minutes since February 05, we are only left to imagine who is driving this agenda. The LAQ has made repeated attempts since 18 September to meet with Mr Mickel. However, this has been to no avail and in fact it was only yesterday—Friday, 5 October—that I was able to get past the receptionist and talk to one of his office staff. The fact that there has been no attempt to reply or acknowledge correspondence, except for an unsigned acknowledgement of our initial email requesting a meeting, or returned phone call messages is far from satisfactory. If a limousine business were to conduct themselves in such a manner, they would never survive. If we, LAQ, did not return QT phone calls in a similar fashion, we would earn the ire of the department. That outlines the LAQ’s view on the consultation in relation to this bill as at Saturday afternoon. I also want to address in terms of clause 29, which inserts section 87B, the comments made in relation to ‘fitted’ and the minister’s comments and his reference to a spare wheel or the jack of a car. I do not know if the minister has changed a wheel lately or got a jack out, but every time I have gone to do that that wheel has been bolted to the wheel well of the car in the boot or has been otherwise firmly affixed to the vehicle, as has the jack. They do not float around in the back of the car rolling around, knocking off the side and knocking off the back. I refer the minister again to the explanatory notes, which, as he knows, are referred to in interpretation of clauses. It says— It also requires a limousine driver to not use a limousine unless it is fitted with an electronic booking and recording system and a prior booking is displayed on the system. I am happy to take the minister’s assurance that that is the case, but I think it would be wiser to have had better legislation to address the issue. I have never said that touting does not go on. I have never made that comment at all. I have said that it is acknowledged that it is inappropriate, that it does go on and that the industry does want to do something to stop it. The issue has always been in relation to this obsession with an electronic booking system device, and it is an obsession or it seems to be an obsession. A paper device—that is, a diary with a note written on it—is as equally a valid a recording system as an electronic device. There is no difference between the two. They are both means of recording information. One may be more modern; one may be more old fashioned. One may be easier; one may be harder. It does not matter; it depends on one’s level of technical competence. No-one is arguing about the requirement to keep it. No-one is saying, ‘Don’t keep it in a vehicle.’ People are just asking whether real consideration has been given in terms of what the association is telling me is a very real concern amongst its members. Minister, I do stand by my comments in relation to ‘fitted’. I think most people would normally expect the word ‘fitted’ to involve affixing it to a part of the vehicle—whether that is a jack or a tyre or any other piece of equipment or even the satnav devices that are affixed to the dashboards of cars and taxis these days. They are all affixed and fitted to the vehicle. I have pointed out specifically how taxi devices are fitted to the dashboards of vehicles. So that is what is required. That is what the explanatory notes seem to indicate. That is what the industry understands it to mean. Some assurance that the mobile phone that we carry in our pocket is fitted to the vehicle, I would say, is very unlikely to go very far in terms of being accepted as a true interpretation of the meaning of the legislation. I think that far more can be done that would resolve this issue without contention, and we would support that. I just think it is an unnecessary imposition that could have been resolved had there been consultation. It does not matter what the minister says and it does not matter what I say; it is what the industry association is putting forward. Mr MICKEL: How I do make it any clearer? I stand by what the department advised me about consultation. The member has spoken to one particular person. I do not know whether that particular person was at those meetings. Irrespective of that, let us not get hung up about it. I do not know whether he was there or not. That is why yesterday I asked Gary Fenlon, the member for Greenslopes, to have a 3306 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 09 Oct 2007 meeting with the guy while I was in cabinet. I understand he did not turn up; I cannot help that. We made ourselves available. The member would appreciate that with a change of ministry people want to rush in. I was advised that there had been plenty of consultation. But, irrespective of that, the commitment that I gave the member in my summing-up is that as we go through the regulatory process there will be consultation. The member is hung up about the system being fitted. I happen to think that a mobile phone sitting in a cradle fits that definition. It may be beyond the scope of the member, but that would be my understanding of it. The member asked me about a paper definition. I said in my reply that people have a hang-up about a paper record, because they feel that a paper record can be rorted. So the commitment I give is that, as we go through the process of the regulation, we will have consultation with the industry. We do not want it to be burdensome. The member asked before about the number of prosecutions. Obviously, with the rorted system that we have had, prosecutions have been difficult, because it is difficult to acquire the evidence. But, seeing that the member asked, I am advised that since January 2006 there has been one complaint and summons for touting. That offender was convicted and fined $300 at Southport. Five offences were detected for plying for hire, which is people standing where they should not. One offender was fined $375, one offender was fined $225, one complaint was dismissed, one complaint was withdrawn and one matter is still being processed. As I said in my summing-up, the low result simply illustrates why the legislation is so necessary. I pointed out that a formal warning of a vehicle blitz was issued in the Gold Coast Bulletin. One of the people who was worried about it was a member of the limousine industry. The member asked particularly about technological devices. In the 21st century there are things such as BlackBerrys where, for example, a text message predating the journey is considered a prebooking. So it is not restricted just to a mobile phone. Information from these devices—and the member might get his staff to show him how to do it—can be downloaded into Excel and similar software programs to become a permanent record. So it is capable of being done. If it eludes my friend, then so be it. There are plenty of people in the industry who know how to use the technology. As I said, operators will be required to keep either an electronic record of the booking or a copy of the electronic record and produce a copy of the record if they are asked to do so by an authorised officer. Clause 29, as read, agreed to. Clauses 30 to 38, as read, agreed to. Clause 39— Mrs CUNNINGHAM (9.14 pm): I want to place on the record my thanks to the minister for the explanation that he gave in relation to this clause. I am certain that all of us here who have children were concerned about the possibility that their children could be caught up in a situation where they could be stopped by somebody without obvious identification. The minister’s notes to me, and as he has said on the record, are that those officers cannot intercept private vehicles at night and that a reasonable excuse can be put forward by a driver who fails to respond to an indication to stop by an inspector not wearing a uniform and in an unmarked vehicle if they reasonably felt that they were at risk. I understand that this was a regulation that has been put into the legislation. Its import is no less. However, as I said to the minister’s advisers, it was not as a regulation that it had been brought to my attention but as part of the legislation. I think all of us are aware of the risks that young people and older people face on the roads when they are asked to pull up. It is a big enough fright for anybody when somebody in a uniform and in a marked vehicle indicates to them to pull over. That is a bit of a jolt to a person’s system. I thank the minister for the clarification and the reassurance that that clarification gives. Clause 39, as read, agreed to. Clauses 40 to 43, as read, agreed to. Clause 44 (Insertion of new ss 35A-35C)— Mr MICKEL (9.16 am): I move the following amendment— 1 Clause 44 (Insertion of new ss 35A–35C)— At page 53, line 15, ‘enter a’— omit, insert— ‘, to enable the officer to effectively exercise a power under this Act in relation to a heavy vehicle, enter the’. Amendment agreed to. Clause 44, as amended, agreed to. Clauses 45 and 46, as read, agreed to. 09 Oct 2007 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 3307

Clause 47— Mr JOHNSON (9.16 pm): Given the length of the debate on this legislation, I do not intend to take up too much time of the House. I just want to again draw the minister’s attention to the issue of volumetric loading. I thank the minister for the way in which he covered this issue in his summing-up. Yesterday I spoke with the minister’s people at the briefing and raised this issue. I was assured by the minister’s departmental officers that there was no issue with volumetric loading. But I draw the minister’s attention to his predecessor’s second reading speech where he stated— The bill also applies the new risk categorisation to dimension and load restraint requirements. In addition to significant maximum fines, authorised officers will be allowed to give directions to the driver or operator of a vehicle which is subject to one or more severe, substantial or minor breaches of a mass, dimension or loading requirement. For example, where a truck carrying livestock is overweight, the authorised officer may direct the driver to the nearest spelling yard to remove some of the cattle before they can continue their journey. I heard what the minister said in his summary this evening in relation to volumetric loading. I spoke with one of the minister’s departmental officers this evening and he assured me that this issue related to fatigue management. I would like further clarification of that issue in the best interests of the heavy livestock transport industry, because volumetric loading, as the minister is well aware, is sacred to the ongoing viability of the livestock industry in Queensland. Ultimately, it increases productivity not only for the growers or the producers of livestock but also for those at the end of the process where the beasts are slaughtered and processed. I was very pleased to hear the minister say that fatigue management strategies are now going to be applied in the near wild in the Northern Territory. That is certainly a plus. For too long logbooks have not been applicable in the territory. One would not know if drivers arriving at the Queensland border, where the logbook program starts, have already driven for eight or 10 hours. I think that is a very good thing and I congratulate the Northern Territory administration for it. I would like the minister to clarify the issue with volumetric loading in relation to the statement in the second reading speech. I draw the minister’s attention to clause 47 which amends section 39F titled ‘Powers for substantial risk breach of mass, dimension or loading requirements’. Although it does not mention animals, I would ask the minister to clarify that point. Mr MICKEL: I think the best way of doing that is to say again for the member, so that he can take it back to the industry, that volumetric and grain loading concessions are not changed by this legislation. If the member wants a further explanation, I can give one, but I think that probably suffices. Mr Johnson: Thank you. Clause 47, as read, agreed to. Clauses 48 to 50, as read, agreed to. Clause 51 (Insertion of new s 48A)— Mr MICKEL (9.22 pm): I move the following amendment— 2 Clause 51 (Insertion of new s 48A)— At page 68, lines 17 to 22— omit, insert— ‘heavy vehicle offence means an offence against a transport Act that involves or relates to a heavy vehicle, other than an offence against— (a) the Queensland Road Rules; or (b) a regulation made under this Act applying to the transport of dangerous goods.’. Amendment agreed to. Clause 51, as amended, agreed to. Clauses 52 to 65, as read, agreed to. Clause 66 (Amendment of s 60 (Evidentiary aids))— Mr MICKEL (9.22 pm): I move the following amendments— 3 Clause 66 (Amendment of s 60 (Evidentiary aids))— At page 89, after line 19— insert— ‘(la) a specified report or specified information required to be given to the chief executive under a transport Act was received on a specified day or has not been received; (lb) no report or information of a specified type required to be given to the chief executive under a transport Act has been received by a specified day;’. 4 Clause 66 (Amendment of s 60 (Evidentiary aids))— At page 90, line 5, ‘safely.’.— omit, insert— ‘safely; 3308 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 09 Oct 2007

(u) a specified mathematical or statistical procedure was carried out in relation to specified information generated, recorded, stored, displayed, analysed, transmitted or reported by an approved intelligent transport system and the results of the procedure being carried out.’.’. 5 Clause 66 (Amendment of s 60 (Evidentiary aids))— At page 90, after line 7— insert— ‘ ‘(3A) A procedure specified in a certificate under subsection (2)(u) is presumed, unless the contrary is proved— (a) to be valid and reliable for the purpose for which it was used; and (b) to have been carried out correctly.’. Mr NICHOLLS: Amendment Nos. 3 to 5 circulated by the minister, and I think also amendments 6 through to 12, deal with the implementation of what is called the Intelligent Access Program. They set up a framework for the legislation to provide for evidentiary provisions to allow the operation of telematics. Basically, they use GPS software and other computing software to track vehicles. I am happy to deal with them all in one hit and say that the opposition has no trouble in supporting them. In fact, we think that this is probably the way of trucking in the 21st century. This is the first step in developing a whole suite of measures that will improve road safety, reduce infrastructure wear, reduce environmental effects, better manage public perceptions and expectations of heavy vehicle movements, and also optimise policy and operations tasks. Obviously, those are some of the words that were used in the summary of the AusRoads Intelligent Access Program feasibility project. We have no trouble in supporting the amendments and, again, we will work to support the rollout of those programs. Initially it is to be a voluntary program and we support the voluntary aspect of it to get it up and running, to prove its feasibility and the concessions that are given in terms of mass load and weight concessions to enable vehicles to take up that system. I have no hesitation in commending that. Mr MICKEL: I confirm to the honourable gentleman that it is my understanding that amendments 6 to 12 cover exactly what the member said. Amendments agreed to. Clause 66, as amended, agreed to. Clause 67, as read, agreed to. Insertion of new clause— Mr MICKEL (9.26 pm): I move the following amendment— 6 After clause 67 (Insertion of new ss 61A–61C)— At page 91, after line 25— insert— ‘67A Insertion of new ss 61D–61G ‘Before section 62— insert— ‘61D Certificates of TCA ‘(1) A certificate purporting to be signed by a person on behalf of TCA stating any of the following matters is evidence of the matter— (a) a specified map in electronic form is or is not an intelligent access map issued by TCA for a specified date or for a specified period; (b) a specified document is or is not a copy of an intelligent access map, or a specified part of an intelligent access map, issued by TCA for a specified date or for a specified period. ‘(2) A certificate purporting to be signed by a person on behalf of TCA stating any of the following matters is evidence of the matter— (a) a specified intelligent transport system was or was not an approved intelligent transport system on a specified date or during a specified period; (b) a specified person was or was not an IAP service provider on a specified date or during a specified period; (c) a specified person was or was not an IAP auditor on a specified date or during a specified period. ‘(3) A person who purportedly signs a certificate of a type mentioned in subsection (1) or (2) on behalf of TCA is presumed, unless the contrary is proved, to have been authorised by TCA to sign the certificate on TCA’s behalf. ‘(4) In this section— IAP auditor means a person engaged by TCA to be an auditor for the intelligent access program. IAP service provider means a person certified by TCA as a service provider for the intelligent access program. ‘61E Intelligent access map ‘(1) An intelligent access map, or a document that is a copy of an intelligent access map or a specified part of an intelligent access map, issued by TCA for a specified date or for a specified period— (a) is admissible in a proceeding under a transport Act relating to a heavy vehicle; and 09 Oct 2007 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 3309

(b) is presumed, unless the contrary is proved, to be a correct representation of the national road network or the specified part of the national road network shown on the map or document, on the specified date or for the specified period. ‘(2) If a defendant for a charge of an offence against a transport Act intends to challenge the correctness of the representation of the national road network or the specified part of the national road network shown on a map or document mentioned in subsection (1) on the specified date or for the specified period, the defendant must give the chief executive written notice of the intention to challenge. ‘(3) The notice must— (a) be signed by the defendant or the defendant’s lawyer; and (b) state the grounds on which the defendant intends to rely to challenge the matter mentioned in subsection (2); and (c) be given at least 14 days before the day fixed for the hearing of the charge. ‘61F Approved intelligent transport system ‘(1) An approved intelligent transport system, including all the equipment and software that makes up the system, is presumed, unless the contrary is proved, to have operated properly on any particular occasion. ‘(2) Without limiting subsection (1), information generated, recorded, stored, displayed, analysed, transmitted and reported by an approved intelligent transport system is presumed, unless the contrary is proved, to have been correctly generated, recorded, stored, displayed, analysed, transmitted and reported by the system. ‘(3) Without limiting subsection (1) or (2), information generated by an approved intelligent transport system is presumed, unless the contrary is proved, not to have been changed by being recorded, stored, displayed, analysed, transmitted or reported by the system. ‘(4) If in a proceeding it is established by contrary evidence that particular information recorded or stored by an approved intelligent transport system is not a correct representation of the information generated by the system, the presumption mentioned in subsection (3) continues to apply to the remaining information recorded or stored by the system despite that contrary evidence. ‘(5) If a defendant for a charge of an offence against a transport Act intends to challenge any of the following matters, the defendant must give the chief executive written notice of the intention to challenge— (a) that an approved intelligent transport system has operated properly; (b) that information generated, recorded, stored, displayed, analysed, transmitted or reported by an approved intelligent transport system has been correctly generated, recorded, stored, displayed, analysed, transmitted or reported by the system; (c) that information generated by an approved intelligent transport system has not been changed by being recorded, stored, displayed, analysed, transmitted or reported by the system. ‘(6) The notice must— (a) be signed by the defendant or the defendant’s lawyer; and (b) state the grounds on which the defendant intends to rely to challenge a matter mentioned in subsection (5)(a), (b) or (c); and (c) be given at least 14 days before the day fixed for the hearing of the charge. ‘(7) This section does not limit section 60(6) or 61. ‘61G Reports and statements made by approved intelligent transport system ‘(1) A report purporting to be made by an approved intelligent transport system— (a) is presumed, unless the contrary is proved— (i) to have been properly made by the system; and (ii) to be a correct representation of the information generated, recorded, stored, displayed, analysed, transmitted and reported by the system; and (b) is admissible in a proceeding under a transport Act relating to a heavy vehicle; and (c) is evidence of the matters stated in it. ‘(2) However, subsection (1)(c) does not apply to information stated in a report made by an approved intelligent transport system that has been manually entered into the system by an operator or driver of a heavy vehicle. Example— If a driver of a heavy vehicle enters the total mass of the vehicle into the intelligent transport system, the information about the total mass of the vehicle stated in a report made by the system is not evidence of the total mass of the vehicle. ‘(3) Also, if in a proceeding it is established by contrary evidence that a part of a report made by an approved intelligent transport system is not a correct representation of particular information generated, recorded, stored, displayed, analysed, transmitted or reported by the system, the presumption mentioned in subsection (1)(a) continues to apply to the remaining parts of the report despite that contrary evidence. ‘(4) If a defendant for a charge of an offence against a transport Act intends to challenge any of the following matters, the defendant must give the chief executive written notice of the intention to challenge— (a) that a report made by an approved intelligent transport system has been properly made; (b) that a report made by an approved intelligent transport system is a correct representation of the information generated, recorded, stored, displayed, analysed, transmitted and reported by the system; 3310 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 09 Oct 2007

(c) the correctness of a statement of a vehicle’s position on the surface of the earth at a particular time that is made by an approved intelligent transport system. ‘(5) The notice must— (a) be signed by the defendant or the defendant’s lawyer; and (b) state the grounds on which the defendant intends to rely to challenge the matter mentioned in subsection (4)(a), (b) or (c); and (c) be given at least 14 days before the day fixed for the hearing of the charge. ‘(6) This section does not limit section 60(6) or 61.’.’. Amendment agreed to. Clauses 68 to 76, as read, agreed to. Clause 77 (Amendment of sch 4 (Dictionary))— Mr JOHNSON (9.27 pm): Very quickly, I draw the minister’s attention to clause 77, which defines a whole host of issues relating to the legislation. This comes back to the important function of the legislation in relation to the chain of responsibility for the heavy transport industry. This clause sets out a whole heap of definitions for consignor, loader, operator, packer, person in control and so on—all of the people at the consignor end of the marketplace. However, I draw the minister’s attention to the fact that, when we talk about the heavy transport industry, we talk about the important functions of safety for the operator of a heavy vehicle—whether it be a type 1 or type 2 road train, an AB-treble or a B-double, or whatever—and the time the operator has to get from point A to point B in the defined driving hours. When operators are stretched in the marketplace and have to breach the conditions of their side of the deal, there is an obligation on the government and the marketplace to advise how the chain of responsibility will be directed at the consignors and the consignees in relation to their roles and responsibilities. We have to be absolutely certain that we make this legislation work in a viable and profitable way, not only for the transport industry but also for the produce industry, the livestock industry, the freight industry and so on. We have to be certain that deadlines can be met and that the people on either end of the chain understand that the operators are confined to this log of rules. I feel that we should be alerting the marketplace to its responsibilities and taking some of the obligation away from the operators themselves. Mr MICKEL: Does the member want me to respond to that? Mr JOHNSON: As I see it, Minister, all along we seem to be blaming the truckie or the transport operator for breaching the terms and conditions but sometimes it is the consignor or the consignee who are the ones that are violating the agreement and pushing the operator. Mr MICKEL: I accept that. What we will do is have a public education program with the industry on this. Actually, I will invite the member for Gregory to be part of it. Mr JOHNSON: Thank you very much, Minister. Mr MICKEL: I move the following amendments— 7 Clause 77 (Amendment of sch 4 (Dictionary))— At page 104, after line 8— insert— ‘ ‘approved intelligent transport system means an intelligent transport system approved by TCA for use under the intelligent access program.’. 8 Clause 77 (Amendment of sch 4 (Dictionary))— At page 109, after line 24— insert— ‘intelligent access map means a map in electronic form issued by TCA showing the national road network. intelligent access program means a program under this Act that allows particular heavy vehicles to have access, or improved access, to the road network in return for monitoring, by an approved intelligent transport system, of the vehicles’ compliance with conditions imposed on the access or improved access.’. 9 Clause 77 (Amendment of sch 4 (Dictionary))— At page 109, line 28, ‘collect’— omit, insert— ‘generate, record’. 10 Clause 77 (Amendment of sch 4 (Dictionary))— At page 116, line 28, ‘60mm’— omit, insert— ‘600mm’. 09 Oct 2007 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 3311

11 Clause 77 (Amendment of sch 4 (Dictionary))— At page 117, line 29, ‘35mm’— omit, insert— ‘350mm’. 12 Clause 77 (Amendment of sch 4 (Dictionary))— At page 118, after line 4— insert— ‘TCA means Transport Certification Australia Limited ACN 113 379 936.’. Amendments agreed to. Clause 77, as amended, agreed to. Clause 78 (Amendment of s 62 (Proceedings for offences)— Mr MICKEL (9.31 pm): I move the following amendment— 13 Clause 78 (Amendment of s 62 (Proceedings for offences))— At page 120, line 11, ‘3 years’— omit, insert— ‘5 years’. Mr NICHOLLS: Before I deal with the clause I thank the minister and his staff for the briefings that they have provided over the past little while. We may disagree on some aspects of it but I do acknowledge the work that they have put into it. I acknowledge that it has been a very long day for them with quite a lot of questions and I thank them for the time and effort that they have put into this legislation. They have been most courteous and helpful all the way through. I hope I am not condemning them too much by saying that on the way through. Perhaps they could be more helpful on other occasions. In terms of amendment 13, this is the one where during the principal debate I asked whether there was an explanation for the increase in the time period. This follows on from the initial amendment from two to three and we are now going from three to five. I think a number of valid points have been raised and perhaps there could be some clarification. We support it. Mr MICKEL: Let me give you the history of this. When I became the minister I became aware of an incident that was brought to my attention by the member for Gladstone. I hope the member does not mind me revealing our private conversation. I think the member heard before that it was a previous Attorney-General, Mr Beanland, who had made it two years to get on with the prosecution. I understood that. The amendment proposed was three years. The issue raised by the member for Gladstone is one that I have a lot of sympathy for, I have to say. However, there was a tension between whether to make it unlimited or make it longer than two years. I felt three was inadequate. I spoke with my colleague the Attorney-General, and we have settled on five. I will give the member an explanation. By saying five I want to send a tough signal about hit-and- runs but that has to be measured against the fact that if a person is accused of an offence then after five years it is difficult to assess a defence. It may be that witnesses have gone or have passed on. It is a balancing act. I am not going to say to the member that I feel tonight five was the magic number. What I have asked the department to do, and they are listening to me now, is monitor this and if subsequently I find that we have to come back here to strengthen it further then that is exactly what I will do. But for the purposes of where I am at four or five weeks in, I wanted to send a tough signal. I am sympathetic to the point the member for Gladstone raised, but I do not want to get it too far out of kilter with other legislation. Amendment agreed to. Clause 78, as amended, agreed to. Clauses 79 to 82, as read, agreed to. Clause 83 (Insertion of new s 124A)— Mr MICKEL (9.34 pm): I move the following amendments— 14 Clause 83 (Insertion of new s 124A)— At page 121, line 25, after ‘section’— insert— ‘61E(2), 61F(5), 61G(4),’. 15 Clause 83 (Insertion of new s 124A)— At page 121, line 27, after ‘section’— insert— ‘61E(3), 61F(6), 61G(5),’. 3312 Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 09 Oct 2007

16 Clause 83 (Insertion of new s 124A)— At page 122, line 7, after ‘section’— insert— ‘61E(2), 61F(5), 61G(4),’. Amendments agreed to. Clause 83, as amended, agreed to. Clauses 84 to 86, as read, agreed to. Clause 87— Mrs CUNNINGHAM (9.35 pm): I seek a clarification in relation to clause 87. The changes to the definition of a bicycle mean that it is a vehicle with two or more wheels that is built to be propelled by human power et cetera. It includes a pedicab, penny-farthing and tricycle. I have to say that I am not too sure about people who still ride penny-farthings. It does not include a wheelchair and then it talks about auxiliary motors. I understand that the problem has been that people have retrofitted whipper snipper motors to bicycles. I want to raise a scenario. In my electorate there is an old fellow who rides a bicycle and I would be very much surprised if he has retrofitted a whipper snipper engine to a bike. He is a wiry old fellow. He would be thinner than a pull-through for a gun. He lives out of town. He rides his bike in and does his shopping. It has a motor on it. It is like an auto bike. What I am asking is: if it is a machine-fitted engine will it still be able to be ridden on the road or will this exclude all two-wheel bicycles that have motors on them? Is the legislation only targeting those that have been bodgied up at home and could be problematic? There are properly built bikes, which we used to call auto bikes, and I would hate to see those outlawed. As I said, this fellow would have to be over 70. If he cannot get around I do not know how he will get his food. He certainly cannot be moved from his own farm because he would shrivel up and die. I am wondering if it is just the ones that are bodgied up at home or whether all bikes with those engines, even if they are properly fitted, would not be able to be ridden on the road. Mr MICKEL: I have to watch what I am going to say to this because I will be at war with my own electorate—they hate those little motor bikes, those pocket rockets. My electorate hate them and I despise them because of the danger that they expose kids to and the danger that they expose pedestrians to. But I suspect the member’s constituent is not in that category. Let us deal with what I hope will be her constituent. The definition of a bicycle excludes a vehicle with an auxiliary motor capable of generating a power output over 200 watts. If he is under 200 watts with an electric motor he would be okay. However, it is extraordinarily difficult for the Queensland police to measure the power output of an auxiliary motor to ensure that it complies with the 200 watt limit. In practice it is almost impossible to do so without confiscating the motor and carrying out a range of laboratory tests upon it. As the member correctly said, regrettably it is kids who retrofit these motors onto bikes and make a nuisance of themselves. I invite the member to come down to my electorate one afternoon and we will sit there and watch all manner of illegality going on which I am keen to stamp out. I hope that through this provision I am making a positive contribution. As to whether the member’s constituent is a law breaker or not, I simply say this: if you are in doubt about it, have him go down to the local constabulary. I am sure that they will be able to put the member’s mind at rest. I cannot give legal advice as I have no idea. I simply want to send another signal to the owners of pocket rockets to look out; we are after them. Mrs CUNNINGHAM: I sympathise with the minister’s frustration. I have already put on the record in debate on various bills that we have to be careful not to exclude any opportunity for kids to be kids. I do not live in a built-up city area. I certainly have constituents who get annoyed with kids on little motorbikes, and I guess these motorised bikes fall into the same category. With the greatest of respect to the minister, there is middle ground somewhere where we have to tolerate a bit of noise to allow kids to be kids. I have to say that they are mostly males who are petrol heads and who work out ways to destroy their father’s motor mowers and all manner of gismos to be able to fit them onto other pieces of machinery to make a little bit of noise and have a ton of fun, remove some bark and other parts of their anatomy when they smash and fall off. But it is part of growing up and it is part of the fun of it. Whilst I understand there is a nexus in densely populated areas, I may one day take up the minister’s offer of coming to have a look at the law breakers that he is referring to. This gentleman’s bike hardly makes any noise. I wonder whether purchased bikes with a motor affixed—which you can actually buy—will be excluded by this change. Mr MICKEL: We are not doing this frivolously to take a bit of bark off a couple of kids and say that it was all fun and games. These bikes are capable of doing 60 to 80 kilometres an hour. I am sorry if I create some offence to the member about the noise. I must say to the member that people living in rural residential acreage in my electorate—as is the case in the electorates of the member for Algester, the member for Woodridge and the member for Waterford, all within the Logan area—are inundating my office with calls about the insufferable noise of these things because the kids ride them—and sometimes 09 Oct 2007 Environmental Protection Amendment Bill 3313 they are not kids—along footpaths. I have had seen people ride them in parks. Last Saturday I was at the shopping centre in my electorate and that was the main complaint in the park. We have had to get council officers as well as police officers on motorbikes or trail bikes to chase these people down. We spoke about the road toll before, but I have to tell the House that fatalities this year on motorbikes are one of the larger contributors to the fact that we will have the highest road toll in Queensland for a number of years. So I cannot take it lightly. I respect the member’s constituent. At the same time I cannot walk away as the responsible minister, nor could I honestly go back as the member for Logan and say that I thought it was a bit of fun to have a bit of noise in the parliament but sympathise with you in the electorate. I will not do that. Sixty to 80 kilometres an hour for an underage kid, often times without a helmet, on an unregistered bike—no way in the world! Clause 87, as read, agreed to. Clauses 88 to 92, as read, agreed to. Schedule (Minor amendments of Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995)— Mr MICKEL (9.43 pm): I move the following amendment— 17 Schedule (Minor amendments of Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995)— At page 129, lines 18 and 19, from ‘37(2)(b)’ to ‘39(3)(b)’— omit, insert— ‘37(2), penalty, paragraph (b), 37(3), penalty, paragraph (b), 38(3), penalty, paragraph (b), 39(3), penalty, paragraph (b)’. Amendments agreed to. Schedule, as amended, agreed to. Third Reading Question put—That the bill, as amended, be now read a third time. Motion agreed to. Long Title Question put—That the long title of the bill be agreed to. Motion agreed to.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AMENDMENT BILL

Second Reading Resumed from 4 September (see p. 2990). Mr MESSENGER (Burnett—NPA) (9.44 pm): In speaking to the Environmental Protection Amendment Bill 2007, I would briefly like to congratulate the minister—who does not seem to be here at the moment—on his appointment to his portfolio of sustainability, climate change and innovation. I know it is a bit of a cliche but— Mr Lawlor interjected. Mr MESSENGER: I will say it anyway. The decisions we make in this chamber are in a lot of cases life and death decisions. I think the decision that he has made in this particular case as Minister for Sustainability, Climate Change and Innovation to allow four-wheel drives to travel along those 11 kilometres of beach on Fraser Island is a very good decision that will save lives. I am glad that those 300-odd vehicle movements on Fraser Island are not channelled up the inland road. I would like to draw the minister’s attention to proposed clause 4 of the Environmental Protection Amendment Bill and section 440B ‘Meaning of litter’, which states that litter includes any waste of a commercial or domestic nature. Under ‘Reasons for the Bill’ in the explanatory notes it states— Litter enforcement is undertaken by authorised persons in the Environmental Protection Agency, with powers delegated to an authorised person of a local government. I would like the minister to consider this scenario. What if it is the local government authority which is in fact the entity responsible for littering? Over a year ago, on around 26 March last year, I had cause to write to the minister, the then Hon. Desley Boyle. I said— Minister, I wish to bring to your notice a serious matter which has recently come to my attention. Members of the public have supplied me with photos of a truck which they allege is part of an operation that daily pumps and dumps raw untreated sewage into pitts which are located just off Captain Cook Drive and approximately 200 metres from the residential housing in Agnes Water just on the outskirts of the township of 1770. 3314 Adjournment 09 Oct 2007

The situation was confirmed in a conversation with Mayor Tom Jeffery of Miriam Vale Shire Council this morning, who stated that dumping had been carried out for a number of years and it appeared that no approval or licence had been given by the EPA for the council or other companies to carry out this dumping. According to concerned community members, the dumping of this raw sewage could have been going on for more than a decade. I expressed to the minister in my letter that I was very concerned about this activity. I received an email from the EPA, as it was at the time, which addressed my concerns. It said— I can advise that the EPA has investigated the issues raised in your letter. The site in question is the Agnes Water landfill that has been operated by the Miriam Vale Shire Council for many years and includes a pit for the disposal of sewage, sludge, effluent under its development approval. Population growth has seen development encroach this site, and the EPA has been in negotiations with the Miriam Vale Shire Council on alternatives. A site inspection was carried out on 4 April and is expected to finalise an alternative to this current practice in the near future. I am very concerned about this practice—that is, the dumping of raw sewage into these sullage pits—that had been going on in my electorate for many years—in fact, decades—with the approval, it seems, of the state government and with the cooperation of the local government. If you take the literal meaning of ‘litter’ in this legislation, litter includes any waste of a commercial or domestic nature. What actually happened at Agnes Water was that a sewage truck—a little tanker—used to go down to the marina, pump the sewage out and then travel down the road five kilometres or less and then dump this raw sewage into a sullage pit. Of course, this raises serious issues regarding public health and also serious issues regarding the environment. I would love the minister to answer my question: is this practice occurring in other areas in the state? I am led to believe that sewage sullage pits were quite common throughout the state before the advent of proper sewerage. I would really like an answer as to the extent of this problem. How many sewage sullage pits, for example, are there in the state? Does the EPA know that? Are they mapped out? Have they been audited? I think it is important to help local government to dispose of sewage in an appropriate manner—certainly in relation to the Town of 1770 and Miriam Vale Shire Council. It has a very basic sewerage system and it needs a lot of help to improve that. There are three dams and the sewage is pumped into these dams untreated. There is a settlement pond and the overflow is pumped out into the forest. I think it is heading towards the stage where we need to consider the zero ocean outfall option and we need to recycle that sewage and use it for irrigation at least for agricultural purposes. I know from the backyard of the minister for sustainability and climate change—Hervey Bay—that the council there is very proactive in the way that it disposes of its effluent. I welcome the new minister to the portfolio and congratulate him on his decision to allow the four-wheel-drive traffic to travel along that beach at 40 kilometres per hour. I think it is a common-sense decision and I believe it is a decision that has immediately saved lives. I would like the minister to have a look at the issue of sewage sullage pits. I was relaying to the chamber that there is a sewage sullage pit at Agnes Water/1770. It was, in fact, the local government authority that was part of the littering process. The question is: what if it is the local government authority who is, in fact, the entity responsible for the littering? Once again, I would like to find out if those sewage sullage pits are still being used within the state of Queensland. I think it is an antiquated process and we really need to have a long, hard, close look at this. When I went there I could not believe it when I saw it. There was a council worker who was in a little outhouse, for want of a better word, near a dump. He said to me that whenever he got mosquito bites they would take a couple of months to heal. That is one of the public health concerns I have. There are children around there and there is quite a lot of residential development. It was a quite a shock to see this happening in the 21st century. With those few words, I commend the bill to the House. Debate, on motion of Mr Messenger, adjourned.

ADJOURNMENT

Hon. AI McNAMARA (Hervey Bay—ALP) (Acting Leader of the House) (9.53 pm): I move—

That the House do now adjourn.

Community Organisations Mr ELMES (Noosa—Lib) (9.53 pm): Tonight I rise to address the House on matters dear to the heart of all Queenslanders—matters relating to our communities and the organisations who play pivotal roles in supporting and helping the disadvantaged amongst us. As the year draws to a close, the majority of us approach the holiday season with joy. For some, however, the expectations are not of joy but of need and disadvantage. In Noosa we are exceptionally blessed with a number of associations who strive to meet these needs. 09 Oct 2007 Adjournment 3315

Tonight I would like to recognise and pay tribute to these community groups. A prime example is one called Frangipani Dreams Giving Hope. As Moy Sweetman, the founder of the organisation, states on her web site, the aim of community groups is ‘all about bringing people together to give hope and unconditional love from one human being to another’. This perfectly describes what community spirit is all about. I commend Frangipani Dreams for achieving its goals of giving hope and easing the burden of others.

I would also like to make special mention of Meals on Wheels, particularly the organisations that exist in Coolum and Noosa. I have had the pleasure of attending their annual general meetings in recent weeks and would like to take this opportunity to thank these outstanding volunteers who do so much— and mean so much—to the people they care for.

I would also like to acknowledge the work of United Synergies Ltd, formerly known as the Noosa Youth Services. This organisation has been operating since 1989 providing accommodation, emergency relief, counselling, mentoring and referral services to disadvantaged youth in the Noosa region. One of the programs delivered by United Synergies is the StandBy Bereavement Response Service, which was recently given substantial Commonwealth funding to roll out its unique service nationally. United Synergies are to be commended, both for developing and delivering these services and for having the foresight to take these services to the national level.

On a personal note, I would also like to thank and commend Ozcare, especially Jo Pennell, the Director of Nursing, at its Noosa Heads facility. During my recent family bereavement, Ozcare provided care, compassion and understanding during what was a very difficult time.

The recent amendments to the Community Services Bill to remove ‘red tape’ and to clarify the decision-making criteria by which community groups will be judged was most welcome. I embrace all the provisions that make the relationship between government and non-government community groups more professional. Furthermore, I have welcomed further assistance to organisations such as Frangipani Dreams and United Synergies in making the government more available to these organisations so that they can continue their very good works for Noosa and the wider Queensland community. They deserve our respect and support, and I commend these organisations to the House.

Deaths of Mr DW Mosby and Mr J Ahmat Mr O’BRIEN (Cook—ALP) (9.56 pm): Since the parliament last sat, two chairman of islands in the Torres Strait, unfortunately, have passed away. Tonight I would like to pay tribute to both of those gentlemen.

On 21 August Mr Donald Mosby, the Chairman of Yorke Island, or Masig as it is known, passed away. Mr Mosby was chairman of the Yorke Island Community Council for two terms, a member of the ICC and held the Torres Strait Regional Authority portfolio for small business and economic development and the portfolio for marine and fisheries. Mr Mosby was also a member of the TSRA Fisheries Committee, the PZJA Management Consultative Structure, the Torres Strait Aquaculture Steering Committee and the North Queensland Indigenous Fishing Committee.

Yorke Island is a beautiful island. It was well served by Mr Donald Mosby. Donald had an infectious enthusiasm. He was one of those people who really made the local member’s job quite easy. All I had to do was get in behind him. He was always in touch with his community. He knew what was going on, knew what needed to be done and went about trying to service his community with other agencies, whether they were federal or state agencies. My job as the local member was just to support Don and to provide whatever support I could for him to go and do his job.

I used to enjoy catching up with him. He always had ideas and schemes on the go about how he could improve his people, about business ideas that he wanted to get up in his community. He was always looking for ways and means to make those happen. He will be sorely missed by his community there on Masig.

Likewise, Jack Ahmat, the chairperson for Badu, passed away on Sunday, 7 October. He was 56 years old. Jack was in his third term as a representative on the TSRA board as well. He was also a member of the ICC.

Badu is the largest community in the outer Torres Strait. It has well over 1,000 people living on Badu now. One of the things that strikes me when I go to Badu is that it is a large Indigenous community. But it is really just a normal suburb like anywhere else. I could be anywhere in Queensland—in any suburb in Queensland—but I am in this remote location. There are houses and people working. 3316 Adjournment 09 Oct 2007

Jack was instrumental in creating what I think is normality and what we are trying to achieve in Indigenous communities—that is all nature of businesses and services and people working together. I am afraid that I have not got time tonight to put all of Jack’s achievements on the record. Both of these gentlemen will be sorely missed. Mourilyan Harbour Boat Ramp and Jetty Mr CRIPPS (Hinchinbrook—NPA) (10.00 pm): Tonight I wish to draw to the attention of the House the current problems with boating infrastructure at Mourilyan Harbour. I am extremely frustrated by this situation which can best be described as nothing less than a debacle. Queensland Transport and the Ports Corporation of Queensland appear to be in a bureaucratic Mexican stand-off while recreational and commercial fishermen go without basic boating infrastructure. Despite a briefing today from Queensland Transport staff, for which I am grateful, I could secure no definite answers about when the current problems with the Mourilyan Harbour jetty or the Mourilyan Harbour boat ramp would be resolved between Queensland Transport and the Ports Corporation of Queensland. For months I have been making inquiries with both Queensland Transport and the Ports Corporation about when my constituents could expect work to start on the upgrade of the Mourilyan Harbour boat ramp which has been an ongoing concern for many years. Late last week local commercial fishing operators contacted me after learning that Queensland Transport intended to remove the lower landing on the Mourilyan Harbour jetty and erect new side railings on the jetty that would restrict access by vehicles used to load and unload commercial fishing vessels. There are many people in the local community, commercial operators and recreational fishermen who are as frustrated as I am. They are not asking for rolled gold infrastructure, just a wharf that can accommodate their loading and unloading needs and a boat ramp where boaties can safety launch and retrieve their vessels. The wharf is the only all-weather, all-tide facility between Cairns and Townsville that can be used to load fuel and unload a commercial catch. Many people rely on the commercial fishing industry in the Innisfail district. This issue is about jobs and the livelihoods of local families. For them this situation is a nightmare. If nothing is done we will lose these jobs to other ports. Fishermen cannot use the Johnstone River in all weather conditions and in all tides because it is full of silt and the state government has refused to allow the river to be dredged. Even if they could get in at all times they could not use the Innisfail jetty because it has been closed for some time. Now they have restricted access to the Mourilyan Harbour jetty. I am very concerned that this has occurred without any apparent consultation. I am also alarmed by the recent indication from Queensland Transport that repairing the lower landing area of the Mourilyan jetty could be contingent on the outcome of current negotiations between the department and the Ports Corporation about the Mourilyan boat ramp. Commercial and recreational fishermen pay their fees for their licences and the registration of their vessels respectively. Fisherman should be able to expect that basic boating infrastructure will be provided and will be maintained so that it can be used by the public safely. I have sought support from the member for Mulgrave and have drawn the issue to the attention of the minister for transport. I call on Queensland Transport and the Ports Corporation of Queensland to come to an agreement to both repair the Mourilyan Harbour jetty and relocate and upgrade the Mourilyan Harbour boat ramp. Death of Mr A Payet Mr WETTENHALL (Barron River—ALP) (10.03 pm): On 1 October 2007 at the age of 33 Alby Payet passed away. He was a valued member of the State Emergency Service at Yorkey’s Knob. He was a valued friend and great community member. Alby joined the Yorkey’s Knob group of the SES in 2003. His intelligence, drive and his people skills with people from all walks of life, of all ages and from all backgrounds was immediately apparent. It was not long before he was one of the key members of that group. Apart from becoming competent in the core skills of the State Emergency Service he also completed extra courses and was a specialist chainsaw and flood boat operator. Alby participated in all the group’s activities including searches, providing assistance to the police and helping people affected by severe weather or flooding. Alby led one of the teams working in cyclone devastated communities after Cyclone Larry. Along with most of the other SES volunteers he took time off from his paid job to volunteer, many times for 15 hours a day, to carry out temporary repairs to damaged dwellings and other work to make life a little easier for the victims of that disaster. In fact, Alby was on duty in Babinda undertaking Cyclone Larry duties when he first became ill. 09 Oct 2007 Adjournment 3317

In recognition of his service to the community generally but the State Emergency Service in particular, Alby was nominated for a Queensland Day Award which was presented by me earlier this year before his family, members of the State Emergency Service and his community. Alby’s passing has devastated his family, friends and the members of the Yorkey’s Knob SES. He is survived by his wife Zoe, children Shanice and Leon, mother Mona, father Olaf, and brothers and sisters Rodney, Richard, Sandra, Rauol and Zoe. Alby embodied all that is best and finest about this country’s tradition of volunteer service. I know that he would be happy for me to take this opportunity to recognise the fine work of his friends and colleagues in his beloved Yorkey’s Knob SES, to which he gave so much, and the community to which he gave so much, and all the SES volunteers right around the state.

Montville-Flaxton Region, Iconic Status Mr WELLINGTON (Nicklin—Ind) (10.06 pm): I rise to speak again to the government’s proposed iconic places legislation. I thank the Deputy Premier and Minister for Infrastructure and Planning for the recent meeting with his senior advisers to discuss the government’s proposed iconic places legislation. I look forward to this new bill being introduced into parliament in the near future and use this opportunity to table a further 33 written submissions I have received from Sunshine Coast residents calling for the Blackall Range to be protected under the government’s proposed iconic places legislation. I realise that time is limited so I will only read into the parliamentary record a short letter from Caloundra Councillor Anna Grossreutz. Anna writes— I write in support of the request received by your office to have the Blackall Range and Conondale Range classed for iconic status. The whole of the Blackall Range is an ecologically and socially diverse area being the watershed for four major river systems in south-east Queensland. Likewise, many tributaries arise from the adjacent Conondale Range. There are numerous fauna and flora species in the region that are recognised at federal, state and regional levels as being seriously at risk. These areas have very unique features and the scenic amenity is irreplaceable and so must be protected under all possible legislation from development which would threaten the integrity of the whole of the area. It is for these reasons that protection should be given to the entire Blackall and Conondale Ranges. Yours faithfully Councillor Anna Grossreutz Division 2 Caloundra City Council I believe that Anna’s letter captures the intent of many of the letters I now table from: Mr Marcus J Aitkin, Mr Fred Collard, Ms Rachel Dent, Mr Gordon Exley, Mrs Judy Exley, Ms Lin Fairlie, Mr Alan Felmingham, Mrs Michele Felmingham, Ms Amelia Field, Mrs Pat Fuller, Mr Mark Fuller, Mr David Gardiner, Mr Ron Geyl, Ms Jane Gibbs, Ms Charlotte Golding, Ms Stella Goodwin, Mr Chris Howard, Ms Helen Inman, Mr Clem McMillan, Mr Barry Brady, Mrs Colleen Brady, Ms Merrily Poulter, Ms Penny Riddoch, Mr Ian Rolle, Mrs Judy Rolle, Mr Matthew Sheild, Mr Peter Stevens president of the Lake Baroon Catchment Care Group Inc., Mr Timothy Tighe, Ms Annie Triming, Ms Georgina Walsh, Ms Lea Wiggins secretary of the Blackall Range Land Use Planning Association Inc. and Mr Dylan Wooster. Tabled paper: Bundle of correspondence relating to the iconic status for The Blackall Range and the Conondale Range. I again take this opportunity to urge the government to not limit the nomination of specific areas for inclusion under the proposed iconic legislation to be only from local councils. I believe that members of the community should be able to nominate areas to the state government for inclusion because of their iconic status. In the past we have seen how local councils do not always get it right with their support for significant developments. The Maroochy Shire Council’s handling of the controversial Links development on the Blackall Range is a real example of why there needs to be stronger state government planning schemes that councils must comply with. Queensland Premier; Eatons Hill State School Mrs LD LAVARCH (Kurwongbah—ALP) (10.09 pm): Last month saw the end of an era with the resignation of Peter Beattie as Leader of the Labor Party and Premier of Queensland. He was a brilliant political campaigner and a great Labor leader. The party and Queensland will miss him greatly. I personally would have loved him to stay, but equally I am excited that Anna Bligh has been appointed as Queensland’s first woman Premier. Women first obtained the right to stand for parliament in 1915 and it has taken 92 years to have a woman appointed as Premier of this state. Having known Anna for quite some years, I can categorically say that she has been appointed Premier not because she is a woman but because of her attributes, her intelligence, her talent, her competence and her capability. I was delighted to join the new Premier on the day after her appointment as Premier, together with the minister for education, training and the arts, the Hon. Rod Welford, at Eatons Hill State School to officially open the school’s prep facilities and to recognise its new recycled water project. As it was her very first official function as Premier, there was much media coverage. The students handled it all very well and were extremely excited to be the centre of attention. The state government has invested $1.27 million in Eatons Hill State School, meaning that 90 new prep students were enrolled at the school this year. This is the largest in the Brisbane north district. That number is set to grow to 140 next year, 3318 Adjournment 09 Oct 2007 making it one of the largest prep schools in Queensland. Eatons Hill State School is to be congratulated on its commitment to educating young Queenslanders on the importance of sustainability by leading the way with such innovative energy and water-saving initiatives. This was the other part of the Premier’s visit to the school. The school can boast solar power generation, the use of energy-saving devices, recycling materials, harvesting water, a local biodiversity project and recently introduced an underground recycled water irrigation system. The water for the irrigation system is sourced from the nearby Brendale Wastewater Treatment Plant and is piped to the ovals, playing areas and gardens through an innovative underground system developed in Australia. The recycled water project represents a great investment of time, skills, funds and collaboration between the school and all levels of government. The state government invested $70,000 in the project, Pine Rivers Shire Council committed $350,000 and a Commonwealth water grant contributed $50,000. Eatons Hill State School is a fantastic example of how Queensland schools can make a difference, not just on school grounds but by sending students home with practical skills and new ideas on sustainable living. I must say that Eatons Hill State School has started a phenomenon of oval envy amongst our state schools in Pine Rivers. It is the greenest oval in Pine Rivers! Mary Valley Heritage Railway Mr GIBSON (Gympie—NPA) (10.12 pm): Many people in my electorate may not be aware that I regularly catch the tilt train to travel to Brisbane for parliament. I do this because I believe in the value of public transport. I also believe that one less car trip reduces pollution in our environment and congestion on our roads. It is also because the timetable is convenient and the trip is comfortable, ensuring that I arrive in Brisbane far more relaxed than I would if I drove. My thanks must go to the professional QR staff who work hard to provide this service. Tonight, however, I want to recognise the service provided by the second largest carrier of rail passengers in Queensland and the third largest operating railway in Queensland in terms of rail kilometres travelled—that is, the Mary Valley Heritage Railway, or MVHR, the service that is known as the Valley Rattler. Last week the MVHR celebrated the addition of steam locomotive C17 967 to her fleet. 967 has been a bit of a wanderer. Built in Maryborough, she worked for QR for 19 years out of Rockhampton. In retirement, she moved to Caloundra then to Alice Springs and then back to Queensland at Beaudesert and from there to the Ipswich Railway Workshops. This year she almost left for Victoria, but thanks to the vision and commitment of some key people she has now found a permanent home in Gympie with one of the most viable heritage railways in Australia. The key person in getting C17 967 to Gympie was Ted Mitchell, General Manager of the MVHR. He is an individual who is passionate about heritage railways and what they offer to the broader community. I distinctly remember my first tour of the MVHR back in 2004. Ted, like a wise and caring father, carefully took me around the carriages, showed me the locomotives, the workshops and explained the wonderful community support that had brought the MVHR to where it is today. Ted had a vision that C17 967 would be a part of the MVHR and never lost that faith. As Tony Hallam, President of the MVHR, said, Ted has shown us that faith can not only move mountains but can move 84 tonne locomotives. I must also offer my thanks to the Jeremy family of Gympie who transported C17 967 to Gympie. I also want to thank the Deputy Premier for his involvement in his former portfolio by ensuring that Queensland kept 967 for all Queenslanders and tourists to enjoy and that it was not lost to Victoria. Finally, I must give praise where praise is due and thank QWI for its assistance in the purchase of 967. Those in this parliament would know that I have been critical of QWI’s actions in the past with regard to the dam, but on this occasion I find no fault. The addition of C17 967 to the MVHR ensures that this wonderful community organisation will continue to be able to provide a quality steam rail experience for many years to come. She is a welcome addition to the family of the Mary Valley Rattler. Along with the men and women who will work with, maintain and support her during her working life with the Rattler, she has finally found a new home. Bulimba State School Mr PD PURCELL (Bulimba—ALP) (10.15 pm): Tonight I want to speak about one of the many great state schools in my electorate, and that is Bulimba State School. I am very proud to be associated with the school and principal, Mr Michael Zeuschner, his staff and of course the children. The school was opened in 1866 and is one of the oldest schools in Queensland. It is a school with a great future. It has been a great school and will continue to be one. It has recently undergone a $4.3 million building program and the success of this building program is largely due to the input and forethought given by principal Michael Zeuschner and the school community led by the P&C. The project has given the school an additional three prep and five general learning classrooms. I inspected the new school block early in term 3 and everybody’s enthusiasm and pride was evident. 09 Oct 2007 Adjournment 3319

There have been a number of inclusions that set this project apart from many other schools. For example, the prep toilets are located within the classrooms themselves, allowing the children total safety when they have to leave their learning environment to go to the bathroom. With a verandah outside, each of these classrooms has an additional learning area for the children to enjoy. Furniture for the classrooms consists of modular pieces so that they can be easily moved according to the children’s learning needs. This means that when the children are doing a presentation or acting out a scenario the furniture can be configured accordingly. A piazza or gathering area for the school has been created in the basement or undercroft, making it an ideal area for parade or school performances, with forward planning allowing for extra classrooms that may need to be built in the future. As the school is built on the side of a hill, one of the things the school community did not want to lose was any existing playground area. To achieve the extra space, building had to be carried out on the hill land, the result being that the school now enjoys extra play areas that have been created with the removal of the portable buildings on the flat play areas which were previously needed to cope with the school numbers. I would like to thank the project manager, the project team and all the workers from Northbuild who worked on the site, and particularly the management for the innovative way in which they constructed the building. They said that it was one of the most challenging buildings that they have completed to date, but they did a marvellous job. I would also like to thank the minister and I would particularly like to thank Al Wagner, who works for the education department, for the way in which he worked with the school community and achieved the great outcomes that he did. I believe that outstanding results in literacy and numeracy will always be a major objective of the school, because they are the building blocks for other key learning areas. The Italian language is a significant part of the school’s learning program. That learning program provides children with the opportunity to learn a second language whilst developing their understanding of another culture. The school is a part of the Gateway Learning Community, which is made up of all the state schools as well as Balmoral State High School in my electorate. This community provides children with an opportunity to be involved in student leadership initiatives.

ShelterBox; Festivals, Currumbin Electorate

Mrs STUCKEY (Currumbin—Lib) (10.19 pm): All of us in this House spend many hours supporting and acknowledging the wonderful community work that service clubs and organisations so selflessly achieve in and around our electorates. Tonight I wish to encourage honourable members to support the ShelterBox project through their local Rotary clubs. ShelterBox delivers humanitarian aid and relief on a worldwide basis in the form of material and equipment that provides, as the name suggests, shelter, warmth and comfort to people displaced by natural and other disasters. ShelterBox resembles a giant plastic esky. Each ShelterBox is uniform in size and usually contains a 10-person tent, 10 thermal blankets, a multifuel cooker and ancillary equipment such as water purification tablets, a torch and batteries, a spade, rope and plastic bags. Other items in this kit include mosquito nets, children’s school supplies, waterproof ponchos and groundsheets with blanket lining, cooking pots and utensils, collapsible water containers and useful basic tools such as hammers and pliers. Weighing 120 pounds—or 54.55 kilograms—and costing $1,200 these brand-new life-saving living quarters have benefited 450,000 people around the world in the past six years since the program was established in the UK. Rotarian Tom Henderson from the Helston-Lizard Rotary Club in Cornwall had an idea to ease human suffering resulting from earthquakes, floods, volcanoes, wars and civil unrest. In February 2000 Tom Henderson’s club, as part of its millennium project, sent the first 50 ShelterBoxes to India following an earthquake. My husband and I were introduced to this remarkably simple, yet effective product through the Kirra-Currumbin Rotary Club and were deeply moved by the DVD footage that showed devastated families picking up the pieces of their shattered homes and setting up their new little shelters. These kits are so versatile that families can set them up among the rubble next to their former homes or in a camp style site. In July this year we decided to purchase one of these ShelterBoxes and just two weeks later received our certificate with a box number AUS 2306. Being able to track each ShelterBox is a unique feature of this program. Tonight, as I was collecting information for this speech, I decided to see if our box had been dispatched. So I logged onto the web site and, lo and behold, I saw that my AUS 2306 had been sent to Pakistan as part of the relief for flood and cyclone victims. The most recent consignment went to Bolivia and one in April went to the Solomon Islands. ShelterBox is now the biggest Rotary Club project in the world. I encourage members to get involved and help promote or purchase one of Tom Henderson’s ideas. I know it will make a world of difference. I ask members to go to www.shelterboxaustralia.com.au and take a look for themselves. I would also like to congratulate the organisers of this year’s Swell Sculpture Festival, which is held along Currumbin’s picturesque foreshore, the longstanding Springfest art and craft festival and the In the Bin outdoor film festival. 3320 Attendance 09 Oct 2007

Camp Hill-Carina Welfare Association; Clem Jones Sports Centre Mr BOMBOLAS (Chatsworth—ALP) (10.22 pm): I assure the member for Currumbin that I know firsthand that the Carindale Rotary Club is doing its bit as well for the ShelterBox. On Saturday afternoon I had the pleasure of being involved in a double celebration in my electorate: the 50th anniversary of the Camp Hill-Carina Welfare Association and the opening of a state- of-the-art indoor pool at the Clem Jones Sports Centre. As the member for Chatsworth, I was also delighted to see our new Premier, the Hon. Anna Bligh, and the Minister for Police, Corrective Services and Sport, the Hon. Judy Spence, take time out of their busy schedules to join in the official proceedings. It is hard to believe that half a century ago a small group of residents met under the gumtrees beside where the bowls club now stands to ponder what could be done about the lack of sportsgrounds and facilities for local youth in the area. From this very humble beginning the Camp Hill-Carina Welfare Association was born. The association, of course, is the driving force behind the development of the 42- acre site from unofficial trotting track and illegal rubbish dump to a wonderful complex that is home to 15 sporting groups. Among the guests on Saturday were founding members of the association, the former Brisbane Lord Mayor Clem Jones and Rowly Cowan. Both men recalled some yarns from the early days, including the birth of the popular Crackerjack Carnival. Life membership was also awarded to the association’s president of the past eight years, the Hon. Terry Mackenroth, former Treasurer and Deputy Premier and long-time member for Chatsworth. As the complex continues to morph, on Saturday we also celebrated the opening of the heated indoor pool, which is to be known as the Trevor Bishop Indoor Pool after another long-serving and hardworking life trustee of the association. I am proud to inform the House that the Queensland government provided funds of $1.5 million through the department of sport and recreation towards the project. The Carina Leagues Club also generously forked out $1 million for the pool. However, that left a shortfall of around $800,000. It pleases me to inform the House that a generous but somewhat frail Clem Jones announced on Saturday that he would donate the outstanding monies—$800,000—taking some hefty financial pressure off the association. Members of the association get a great buzz out of seeing young people running around the footy fields or playing softball. The basketball courts are always filled and the pool area is regularly packed. In fact, everywhere you look around the Clem Jones complex kids are having a great time just being kids. Even big kids are having a fat time. This was exactly the dream that the association had in mind 50 years ago when it started work on a block of neglected land at the end of a dirt road. The Trevor Bishop Indoor Pool is testimony to the fact that the association and its members are still responding to community needs. I am proud to say that my 16-month-old son, Mitch, will learn to swim there and perhaps even develop some sporting skills along the way. Motion agreed to. The House adjourned at 10.26 pm. ATTENDANCE Attwood, Barry, Bligh, Bombolas, Boyle, Choi, Copeland, Cripps, Croft, Cunningham, Darling, Dempsey, Dickson, Elmes, English, Fenlon, Finn, Flegg, Foley, Fraser, Gibson, Gray, Hayward, Hinchliffe, Hobbs, Hoolihan, Hopper, Horan, Jarratt, Johnson, Jones, Keech, Kiernan, Knuth, Langbroek, Lavarch, Lawlor, Lee Long, Lee, Lingard, Lucas, McArdle, McNamara, Male, Malone, Menkens, Messenger, Mickel, Miller, Moorhead, Mulherin, Nelson-Carr, Nicholls, Nolan, O’Brien, Palaszczuk, Pearce, Pitt, Pratt, Purcell, Reeves, Reilly, Reynolds, Rickuss, Roberts, Robertson, Schwarten, Scott, Seeney, Shine, Simpson, Smith, Spence, Springborg, Stevens, Stone, Struthers, Stuckey, Sullivan, van Litsenburg, Wallace, Weightman, Welford, Wellington, Wells, Wendt, Wettenhall, Wilson